Author:

Keywords:

Hubris hypothesis, Social comparison, Impression management, Egocentrism

Abstract:

Observers dislike braggers who brag explicitly comparatively (“I am better than others”) but accept braggers who describe their qualities superficially non-comparatively (e.g., “I am good”) despite that fact that non-comparative self-judgements also rest upon social comparison and are thus ‘implicitly’ comparative. The hubris hypothesis states that observers accept implicitly comparative braggarts because these braggarts, as opposed to explicitly comparative ones, do not seem to think negatively about others and therefore about them. We derived the prediction that observers’ dislike of explicitly comparative braggarts should be mitigated if these compare the self to an outgroup of the observers, so that these cannot assume that the braggarts view them negatively. Two experiments, one with minimal and one with real-life groups, supported the prediction. A third experiment revealed that observers believe that implicitly (vs. explicitly) comparative braggarts do not as much wish to convey a message about others and more strongly wish to convey a message about themselves. Braggarts do wise to frame their bragging non-comparatively or to compare with an outgroup of their audience.