Comparing ourselves to others can become a healthy habit

Los Angeles Times - Mar 20th, 2025

The story unfolds with a parent-daughter debate over screen time, leading to an exploration of the broader implications of social comparison. The parent, who is the author, reflects on the contradiction in discouraging comparisons due to their negative impact while inadvertently using them as a basis for parenting decisions. This revelation serves as a backdrop to a more significant discussion on the psychological role of social comparisons, particularly in the digital age, where platforms like Facebook can amplify feelings of envy and decrease well-being.

Historically, social comparisons have been perceived negatively, but recent research suggests they can be beneficial if approached with the right mindset. The article highlights studies where comparisons with those who are worse off provided comfort and motivation to participants. The author, Ethan Kross, emphasizes that while comparisons can indeed lead to negative emotions, they also offer opportunities for self-improvement and gratitude if managed thoughtfully. This nuanced understanding of social comparisons highlights their dual role in shaping self-worth and emotional well-being.

Social Media Facebook Screen Time Social Comparison Psychology Ethan Kross Digital Well Being

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.4

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a well-rounded exploration of social comparison, balancing its potential negative and positive effects. It is accurate in its depiction of psychological theories and presents a clear, engaging narrative. However, it could benefit from more diverse sources and greater transparency regarding research methodologies. The topic is timely and of public interest, with the potential to influence readers' perspectives on social comparison. While not highly controversial, the article effectively challenges common misconceptions, encouraging readers to reconsider their views on the subject. Overall, it is a well-crafted piece that offers valuable insights into a relevant and impactful topic.

Accuracy

The article presents a well-researched discussion on social comparison, aligning with established psychological theories such as Leon Festinger's social comparison theory. It accurately describes the negative impact of social media on well-being, supported by early research findings. However, the article would benefit from citing more recent studies to provide updated evidence, particularly concerning diverse social media platforms. The claim that social comparison is universal across cultures and income brackets is plausible but requires additional verification from anthropological or sociological studies.

Balance

The article provides a balanced view of social comparison, acknowledging both its potential negative and positive effects. It discusses how comparisons can lead to envy and decreased well-being but also highlights their role in self-improvement and motivation. However, the article could improve by incorporating perspectives from those who might disagree with the notion that social comparison can be beneficial, such as experts who emphasize its risks more heavily.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and clearly written, making complex psychological concepts accessible to a general audience. It uses relatable examples, such as the interaction between the parent and tween, to illustrate its points effectively. The logical flow from personal anecdote to broader psychological insights aids comprehension and maintains reader engagement.

Source quality

The article is primarily based on the author's expertise as a professor of psychology, which lends credibility to the claims made. However, it lacks a variety of external sources or references to studies by other researchers, which would strengthen its authority. Including a broader range of sources, such as peer-reviewed studies or expert opinions, would enhance the article's reliability.

Transparency

The article is transparent about the author's background and the source of the content, being adapted from a book. However, it does not provide detailed explanations of the research methodologies mentioned, such as the studies on social media effects or the ongoing research with Micaela Rodriguez and Ozlem Ayduk. Greater transparency in these areas would improve the reader's understanding of the basis for the claims.