comparison strongprocessesstrong in social judgment mechanisms and.pdfVIP

Psychological Review Copyright 2003 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 2003, Vol. 110, No. 3, 472–489 0033-295X/03/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.472 Comparison Processes in Social Judgment: Mechanisms and Consequences Thomas Mussweiler Universita¨t Wu¨rzburg This article proposes an informational perspective on comparison consequences in social judgment. It is argued that to understand the variable consequences of comparison, one has to examine what target knowledge is activated during the comparison process. These informational underpinnings are concep- tualized in a selective accessibility model that distinguishes 2 fundamental comparison processes. Similarity testing selectively makes accessible knowledge indicating target–standard similarity, whereas dissimilarity testing selectively makes accessible knowledge indicating target–standard dissimilarity. These respective subsets of target knowledge build the basis for subsequent target evaluations, so that similarity testing typically leads to assimilation whereas dissimilarity testing typically leads to contrast. The model is proposed as a unifying conceptual framework that integrates diverse findings on compar- ison consequences in social judgment. Human judgment is comparative in nature. When people eval- occur spontaneo