This paper aims to explore the concept of "Better-than-average-effect," a phenomenon in which people believe that they are above average compared to others in relation to positive traits and abilities. The first section conceptualizes the better-than-average effect by distinguishing it from other forms of self-serving biases. The subsequent section presents various theological constructs that explain what drives the behavior. The paper finally provides a real-life example of how the better-than-average effect is manifested.

Conceptualization of Better-than-average Effect

The better-than-average (BTA) effect is a form of social comparison in which individuals compare their behaviors or characteristics against a standard or norm. People perceive themselves as unique and exceptional, rather than common and average, especially when comparing themselves against their peers (Brown, 2012). Hence, the BTA effect can be defined as the tendency to gauge an individual's current personality traits, attributes, or abilities more favorable compared to those of the average peer. The BTA effect is generally classified as an indicator of self -serving bias, the proclivity to view oneself in an overly favorable manner. To fully conceptualize the BTA effect, it is important to distinguish it from other forms of self-serving biases. A related study on unrealistic optimism suggests that individuals believe that at any given time, positive outcomes are likely to override negative results in their lives (Guenther & Alicke, 2010). Such studies derive concepts from the BTA premise because of the self-evaluations relative to a typical other. However, while unrealistic optimism studies focus on judgments of what is imminent, the BTA effect involves judgments about one's current traits, attributes, or abilities. Therefore, a defining characteristic of the BTA effect is the 'present' self-perception that might be key correlates of future life choices and behavior.

Theoretical Constructs

Initial account of the BTA effect attributed self-enhancement needs to be the key driver of the better-than-average behavior. Alicke (1985), cited in Brown (2012), argued that people often like to talk positive or nice things about themselves because it gives them the satisfaction that they are better than their average peers. Subsequent studies have offered different accounts, acknowledging that self-enhancement needs only part of the driver and not its primary driver. The studies have suggested other cognitive mechanisms at play, such as egocentrism, naive realism, focusing illusion, and informational differences. In social psychology, informational differences are defined as the inclination of people to know about themselves compared to the rest, and focal illusion (or focalism) entails focusing on oneself when confronted with comparative judgments. Naive realism, on the other hand, is the human proclivity to believe that we perceive the world around us objectively and that anyone who disagrees with us must be biased, irrational, or uninformed. As for egocentrism, people often tend to give excessive weight to their personal view of things. Guenther & Alicke, (2010) also confirm that the above factors also contribute to the BTA effect without any motivating need.

Guenther & Alicke (2010) note that studies on the cognitive foundations of the BTA have added more insight into BTA effect drivers. However, the authors argue that at the same time, more focus on cognitive explanations has led to decreased emphasis on motivational ones, thereby painting a one-sided representation of the BTA effect. Based on the foregoing, Guenther & Alicke (2010) concluded that regardless of the drivers (i.e., cognitive process or motivational process), the BET effect is influenced by a wish to enhance, restore, and preserve feelings of self-worth.  Nonetheless, the underlying factor is that the BTA effect is influenced not only by emotional factors such as a desire to present or perceive the self as an above average than others but also cognitive contributors.

Motivational factors

Brown (2012) explains that individuals are motivated to think of themselves as above average compared to their peers, and this yearning for favorable self -beliefs is a key driver to the BTA effect. Consistent with Kirn, Kwon, & Chiu's (2017) notion of motivational drivers, increased BTA effects are realized on positive traits, while lower effects are prevalent in negative traits that are considered controllable. Guenther & Alicke (2010) believe that the established correlation could be due to the tendency of individuals to ascribe their merits to internal influences (e.g., financial capability) and limitation to external forces (e.g., fate).

Moreover, the BTA effect is more weighty in vague dimensions (Brown, 2012), abstract dimensions (Guenther & Alicke, 2010), along with dimension that does not have external verification (Hoyt, Price, & Emrick, 2010), seemingly because human beings tend to define these dimensions in a self-serving and idiosyncratic manner.

The BTA effect has also been found to be more pronounced in traits that are considered both culturally important (Kirn, Kwon, & Chiu's, 2017) and personally significant (Brown, 2012). The reason being that the traits could be of increased motivational significance compared to traits that are perceived to be less weighty or less important. In a study conducted by Brown (2012), the findings revealed that participants who were ranked as having low intelligence based on peer review recorded the highest BTA effect than those who's intelligence was ranked. The findings illustrate that a desire to protect or promote 'self­ worth' influences the BTA effect.

A similar study conducted by Guenther & Alicke (2010) demonstrated that comparative assessments of the average individual relative to the self (i.e., how the average person's honesty compares to our own) are yield positive responses compared to an absolute rating of the typical individuals (i.e. how the other individual is honest). Further, the study revealed that the same tendency to isolate the average individual from the self is higher when addressing undesirable behaviors and traits compared to desirable attributes.  In general, the two study findings show that human beings tend to distance the average person from the self when doing the comparative evaluation, but that isolation is only limited to undesirable traits. When the traits are considered desirable thus motivationally significant, human beings tend to associate themselves with the average person.

Cognitive mechanisms

A study on social psychology also reveals that multiple cognitive factors result in the BTA effect and related phenomena (Brown, 2012). One of the leading cognitive contributors is egocentrisrn, which is defined as the tendency to be self-focused, such that one is incapable of imagining any other perspective. The excessive focus on oneself makes people view themselves as better than the average person on attributes they consider desirable and lowly on traits that are undesirable in their perspective.  Moreover, comparative judgments of the self are highly correlated to absolute judgments of oneself compared to absolute assessment of the average individual. Egocentrisrn might manifest, often reasonably, due because human beings tend to be conscious about themselves than they are about others hence form a judgment based on what they are 'absolutely' conscious about when forming an opinion (Guenther  & Alicke, 2010).

The other cognitive factor that explains the BTA effect is focalisrn, a condition in which individuals inflate the abilities and attributes of the focal item when forming judgments, which in several instances, the self. Brown (2012), for example, curated response scales such that the self was the focus of the evaluation, hence more focal than the average individual. The author asked the subjects how honest they perceived themselves compared to the relative person. Kirn, Kwon, & Chiu, (2017) replicated the study expect that the authors reversed the subject to be focused on and asked the participants how they viewed the average person, to be honest in relation to themselves. The study showed that the BTA effect was reduced when the focus was aimed at the average person and not the self.

Lastly, an equally important explanation known as the generalized group account adds to the cognitive mechanism literature in relation to the BTA effect. According to Hoyt, Price, & Emrick (2010), the generalized group account, BTA effect is influenced by people's tendency to view individualized items such as the self, more positively than non­ individualized items such as groups or the average group member. Brown (2012) supports the explanation by arguing that individuals usually view other people, such as their child, partner, or even strangers, as above average. The study findings confirm that the BTA effect might occur because individualized units, such as the self, are perceived more positively compared to aggregated units, such as the average individual. Although individuals view others as above average, human beings still think they are superior to both specific people and group aggregates.

Example in Real-World

The better-than-average effect manifests itself in the real world daily. For example, Robert James Fischer, an American chess grandmaster, openly claimed that he was the world's greatest chess player of all time, and indeed he was during his time. Michael Gerard Tyson, an American former professional boxer, also claimed that he was the best heavyweight boxer in the world. It is not surprising that the two 'legends' viewed themselves as better than the average person. However, many people over-emphasize their ability and personality when our sense of worth are assessed objectively. Kirn, Kwon, & Chiu's (2017) explained the BTA effect in terms of self-enhancement bias. The authors conducted a study where subjects were asked to assess their abilities relative to those of a typical person, an average person, and those whose skills fall under the 40th to 60th percentile. The study findings showed that people view 'average' was based on their perceived difficulty of the ability. Abilities considered easy (such as written or spoken expression) were assigned to an 'average' value at the 40th percentile. As for skills deemed difficult, the subject construed an 'average' mark at or above the SOth percentile. Further, when asked about their abilities, they ranked them as better than average.

Conclusion

This study has deconstructed the meaning better-than-average effect highlighted the unique characteristics that distinguish it from other self-serving biases. The preceding literature has also explored the underlying mechanisms that drive the BTA effect. Current literature on the BTA effect stresses that the phenomenon is not only driven by motivational factors but also cognitive factors. Regardless of the motives, the key takeaway is that people actually believe that they are better than their average peers.

References