Summary: Illusory superiority is a cognitive bias that causes people to overestimate their positive qualities and abilities and to underestimate their negative qualities, relative to others. This is evident in a variety of areas including intelligence, performance on tasks or tests and the possession of desirable characteristics or personality traits. It is one of many positive illusions relating to the self, and is a phenomenon studied in social psychology.

Illusory superiority is often referred to as the above average effect. Other terms include superiority bias, leniency error, sense of relative superiority, the primus inter pares (first among equals) effect, and the Lake Wobegon effect (named after Garrison Keillor’s fictional town where “all the children are above average”). The phrase “illusory superiority” was first used by Van Yperen and Buunk in 1991.

Read The Full Article Here

-

Self-enhancement and Superiority Biases in Social Comparison

An overview of self-related superiority biases in social comparison is presented. Included are false consensus, false uniqueness, pluralistic ignorance, illusory superiority, unrealistic optimism, the sensitive and multifaceted self, the “Barnum” effect and the self-other asymmetry. Important conceptual and theoretical problems characterizing the field are pointed out and a review of cognitive explanations is presented. It is argued that most superiority biases are closely related to each other and that the self-enhancement motive or the pervasive tendency to see oneself in a favourable light offers a more fruitful approach towards their integration than the cognitive point of view. Some theoretical and heuristic implications of the proposed integration are briefly outlined.

Read The Full Article Here

-

Ambiguity and self-evaluation: The role of idiosyncratic trait definitions in self-serving assessments of ability

Proposed that such assessments occur because the meaning of most characteristics is ambiguous, which allows people to use self-serving trait definitions when providing self-evaluations. Studies 1 and 2 revealed that people provide self-serving assessments to the extent that the trait is ambiguous, that is, to the extent that it can describe a wide variety of behaviors. Study 3 more directly implicated ambiguity in these appraisals. As the number of criteria that Ss could use in their evaluations increased, Ss endorsed both positive and negative characteristics as self-descriptive to a greater degree. Study 4 demonstrated that the evidence and criteria that people use in self-evaluations is idiosyncratic. Asking Ss explicitly to list the evidence and criteria they considered before providing self-evaluations did not influence their self-appraisals. However, requiring Ss to evaluate themselves using a list generated by another individual caused them to lower their self-appraisals. Discussion centers on the normative status of these self-serving appraisals, and on potential consequences for social judgment in general.

Read The Full Article Here

If you enjoyed that why not find a job or read our guide to working in the 21st century. You can also join our Kiva team or hire me for your project.