Social comparisons in the classroom: An investigation of the better than average effect among secondary school children

Theory of Mind and Social Informant Discrepancy in Autism

When autistic youth are asked to assess their own social skills, they frequently rate themselves more favorably than their parents rate them. The magnitude of this informant discrepancy has been shown to relate to key clinical outcomes such as treatment response. It has been proposed that this discrepancy arises from difficulties with Theory of Mind. Participants were 167 youth 11 to 17 years old; 72% male, and their parents. Youth completed self-report measures of social skills and social cognitive tasks, while their parents completed questionnaires regarding social skills. A repeated-measures ANOVA indicated both non-autistic and autistic youth rated themselves more favorably than their parents rated them across all measures. Zero-order correlations revealed that raw differences between parent- and participant-report were negatively correlated with scores on parent-reported Theory of Mind measures. However, polynomial analysis did not indicate interaction effects between parent- and participant-report on any of the measures used. Polynomial regression revealed that increases in parent-reported social skill predicted larger increases in parent-report Theory of Mind at low levels of parent-reported social skill compared to high levels of parent-reported social skill. Participant-report social skills predicted performance on a behavioral Theory of Mind test in a curvilinear fashion, such that the relationship was positive at low levels of participant-reported social skills, but negative at high levels. This study replicates the finding that raw difference score analyses may result in illusory effects that are not supported when using more contemporary analysis methods, and that more complex and subtle relationships between social insight and perspective-taking exist within autistic youth.

Children's self-evaluation of their prosociality when comparing themselves with a specific versus abstract other

This study examines the development of children's self-assessment of their prosociality in normative social comparisons with an average peer, who was either a concrete individual, or an abstract one, at a school of average socioeconomic level in south Israel (N = 148, Age 6-12 years, 51% females; June 2021). Results show that older children exhibited the better-than-average (BTA) effect by perceiving themselves as more generous than their average peer. Conversely, younger children exhibited a worse-than-average effect, in that they assumed that their peers would act more generously than themselves (η p 2 = .23 ). Only the older children (aged 8 years onward) were significantly affected by the concreteness of the target of comparison by exhibiting the BTA effect only when the average peer was abstract (not concrete).

Who's more generous than me? Children's self-evaluation of their prosociality in normative social comparisons

We examined the development of children's self-evaluation of their prosociality in normative social comparisons (with an average peer). Results suggest that when comparing themselves with an average other in the abstract (i.e., without reference to actual behavior), elementary school children (aged 6-12 years) demonstrated the better than average (BTA) effect of perceiving themselves as more prosocial than their average peer (Study 1). However, when they evaluated other children's prosociality (sharing), after experiencing an actual opportunity to share their endowment with others (Studies 2 and 3), the younger children (at first-grade level) exhibited the worse than average (WTA) effect in that they assumed that their peers would act more generously than themselves. Task difficulty predicted relative self-evaluations across all examined ages, such that greater difficulty was related to a lower BTA effect (or a greater WTA effect). However, whereas the older children used abstract difficulty perceptions to evaluate themselves relative to others, the younger children's evaluations were affected only by the difficulty that they themselves experienced. In all age groups, the BTA effect was driven mostly by participants who were above the mean in the extent of their sharing, whereas the WTA effect was driven by those who shared below the mean of their age group.

Positive Illusory Bias Still Illusory? Investigating Discrepant Self-Perceptions in Girls with ADHD

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether girls with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) demonstrate positive illusory self-perceptions during adolescence and young adulthood.

METHODS

We tested, across a 5-year longitudinal span, whether self-perceptions versus external-source ratings were more strongly predictive of young adulthood impairment and depressive symptoms. Participants included an ethnically diverse sample of 140 girls with ADHD and 88 comparison girls, aged 11-18 years (M = 14.2) at adolescent and 19-24 years (M = 19.6) at young adult assessment.

RESULTS

Although girls with ADHD rated themselves more positively than indicated by external ratings, their self-reports still did not differ significantly from external ratings in both scholastic competence and social adjustment domains. Comparison girls, on the other hand, rated themselves significantly less positively than indicated by external ratings in social adjustment. Positive discrepancy scores in adolescence did not significantly predict depressive symptoms in young adulthood and vice versa. Crucially, measures of actual competence in adolescence were more strongly associated with young adulthood impairments than were inaccurate self-perceptions for girls with ADHD.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings continue to challenge the existence of a positive illusory bias among girls with ADHD, including any association of such bias with key indicators of impairment.