Abstract
The authors suggest that social comparison research has neglected communal feelings and concerns because it typically asks participants to compare objective characteristics that invite evaluative rankings (e.g., test scores) with acquaintances or strangers without any interaction. The authors asked 138 undergraduates to record their spontaneous social comparisons for 1 week; they found that participants often compared subjective characteristics (e.g., feelings), with close others, and during interactions. Comparing subjective characteristics, with close others, or during interactions increased the likelihood of communal outcomes (e.g., feeling connected, focusing on similarities as opposed to differences). Communal traits also predicted feeling connected during comparisons; agentic traits predicted feeling confident and comparing downward. The authors conclude that the basic interpersonal axes—agency and communion— together shape social comparisons as they occur in daily life.