ADHD glossary · Family perspectives
Social comparison: identify the person and the dimension being compared
In its account of social comparison theory, the APA Dictionary describes evaluating one's abilities and attitudes relative to other people. It uses upward, downward, and lateral for comparisons with someone judged better, worse, or approximately equal, respectively, on the relevant dimension. [1]
General education and practical perspectives. Editorial standards.
The important qualification is “on the relevant dimension.” Comparing how quickly two people assemble a model is not the same as deciding which person is more worthwhile. This page explains the comparison process, without assuming that it has one emotional effect or revealing why somebody made it.
Two finished models, different information
In a fictional household, an adult learning model-making looks at a friend's neatly assembled miniature greenhouse. Their own version is unfinished, and they say they are much slower. The friend explains that their model was built over several weekends; the photograph only shows the result.
The comparison concerned speed, but neither person had initially specified the time involved. They might still compare methods or finished pieces if they want. The missing context does not make comparison forbidden; it limits what the first comparison can establish.
Another distinction appears if the adult says they dislike their model. That is an evaluation of the model. If they say they are incapable of learning, that is a much broader claim. A relative can ask what is being compared without pretending to settle either statement with encouragement.
Keep the comparison small enough to understand
An optional reading note can name four details: the comparison target, the quality being compared, what is actually known, and what is missing. “Their finished display versus my first afternoon” is a different description from “They are better at everything.”
The labels upward, downward, and lateral describe the direction as judged by the person making the comparison. They are not rankings of human value. This glossary does not measure those directions or claim that one direction is always helpful or harmful.
Comparing oneself with an earlier version of oneself also raises a different question from using another person as the reference. Keep that distinction visible when reading advice that uses the word comparison loosely.
What relatives can ask without taking over
A parent hearing a child compare two drawings can ask whether the child is talking about color, neatness, time, or something else. A teen may want to explain a comparison without receiving a speech about avoiding all comparison. Partners can discuss the information behind a statement before treating it as a verdict on the relationship.
An older relative should not be made the automatic standard for how quickly another person ought to master a hobby. Experience, available time, and the chosen task can be described without converting family history into a required benchmark.
None of these questions is a treatment for distress or a technique guaranteed to change self-esteem. Social comparison names a process. It does not diagnose envy, infer ambition, establish a person's capability, or explain every reaction to seeing what others have done.
Sources
1. American Psychological Association. Social comparison theory. APA Dictionary of Psychology. Updated April 19, 2018. Accessed September 6, 2026. Complete entry; the terminology and direction distinctions are adopted, not the entry's research-outcome summaries. Retrieved through the publisher application's public definition endpoint. Entry.
Related guides
Sources and what they support
These sources support the specific statements identified below. Our practical exercises are suggestions to consider, not evidence of a treatment effect.
-
social comparison theory — American Psychological Association — APA Dictionary of Psychology
Source type: professional reference.
Updated . Accessed .
Source check, September 6, 2026: Scoped source check. Passage: Social comparison theory entry: opening proposition and upward/downward/lateral definitions; subsequent outcome discussion inspected but not adopted. Limits: Reference account of a theory, not the original Festinger study. No universal effect on mood, self-image, motivation or self-worth; no study procedure or comparison example reproduced.
Supports: In its account of social comparison theory, the APA Dictionary describes evaluating one's abilities and attitudes relative to other people. It uses upward, downward, and lateral for comparisons with someone judged better, worse, or approximately equal, respectively, on the relevant dimension.
Correction check: Complete current publisher entry and its Updated on field inspected September 6, 2026. No separate correction or withdrawal notice appeared in the entry response. No publisher version archive or exhaustive correction-database search was available or performed; recorded status only describes material checked.
Updates and corrections
Published .
Found a factual error or something unclear? Use the contact route on our Trust page. Read our research method for the evidence approach.