Institute of Psychology, University of Münster, Germany.
Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, UK.
J Affect Disord. 2023 Feb 1;322:132-140. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2022.11.012. Epub 2022 Nov 11.
People are constantly preoccupied with how they are doing compared to different standards. This preoccupation influences judgments of well-being, including depression. However, research on well-being comparisons is scarce, also due to a lack of a measure of multi-standard comparisons.
Our research goals were twofold. First, we validated the Comparison Standards Scale for well-being (CSS-W). Second, by drawing on central propositions of the general comparative-processing model, we examined the association of habitual well-being comparisons, their perceived discrepancies with the standard, and engendered affect with depressive symptoms and psychological well-being in dysphoric participants (N = 500). The CSS-W assesses habitual social, temporal, counterfactual, and criteria-based upward and downward comparisons regarding their a) frequency, b) perceived discrepancy, and c) engendered affect.
The findings confirmed the theoretically expected two-factor solution representing aversive (mostly upward) and appetitive (mostly downward) comparisons. Comparison frequency, discrepancy, and engendered affect were associated with depression and well-being. Yet, aversive comparisons displayed higher associations with the outcomes than appetitive comparisons. In particular, frequency of appetitive comparisons was not significantly correlated to depression. In line with our central theory-driven hypothesis, the relationship between frequency of aversive comparisons with depression was partially mediated by serial effects of comparison discrepancy and affect, whereas the relationship with well-being was fully mediated by comparison discrepancy and affect.
The cross-sectional design of the study does not allow for conclusions of causal relations between the measured variables.
The presented framework proves useful in examining significant comparison processes in well-being and depression.
人们总是不断地关注自己与不同标准相比的表现。这种关注会影响幸福感的判断，包括抑郁。然而，由于缺乏衡量多标准比较的方法，幸福感比较的研究仍然很少。
我们的研究目标有两个。首先，我们验证了幸福感比较标准量表（CSS-W）。其次，根据一般比较加工模型的核心命题，我们调查了习惯性幸福感比较、与标准的感知差异以及在抑郁参与者（N=500）中产生的情绪与抑郁症状和心理幸福感之间的关系。CSS-W 评估了习惯性的社会、时间、反事实和基于标准的向上和向下比较，涉及它们的 a）频率、b）感知差异和 c）产生的情绪。
研究结果证实了理论上预期的两因素解决方案，代表了厌恶（主要是向上）和渴望（主要是向下）的比较。比较频率、差异和产生的情绪与抑郁和幸福感相关。然而，厌恶比较与结果的相关性高于渴望比较。特别是，渴望比较的频率与抑郁没有显著相关。与我们的中心理论驱动假设一致，厌恶比较与抑郁之间的关系部分通过比较差异和情绪的序列效应来介导，而与幸福感之间的关系则完全通过比较差异和情绪来介导。
研究的横断面设计不允许得出测量变量之间因果关系的结论。
所提出的框架在检查幸福感和抑郁中的重要比较过程方面是有用的。
