We Know Who Likes Us, but Not Who Competes Against Us.

Psychol Sci

3 Department of Management and Organizations, University of Michigan.

Published: February 2017

AI Article Synopsis

  • Existing research shows people can accurately gauge how much their acquaintances like them, but has only looked at positive feelings.
  • The study introduces the concept of dyadic meta-accuracy in a competitive context, analyzing how well people understand competition among colleagues.
  • Results indicate that while self-projection works for understanding liking, it fails with competition, as competing against better performers often disrupts reciprocal feelings.

Article Abstract

Research on dyadic meta-accuracy suggests that people can accurately judge how their acquaintances feel toward them. However, existing studies have focused exclusively on positive feelings, such as liking. We present the first research on dyadic meta-accuracy for competition, a common dynamic among work colleagues. Data from the sales staff at a car dealership and students working on project teams suggest that the prevailing model of dyadic meta-accuracy breaks down for judgments of competition. For liking, projecting one's own feelings promotes dyadic meta-accuracy because colleagues tend to reciprocate each other's liking. For competition, the tendency to compete against superior performers reduces reciprocity and renders self-projection ineffective. You can accurately estimate how much your colleagues like you, but are unlikely to know how much those same colleagues compete against you.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797616679440DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

dyadic meta-accuracy
16
likes competes
4
dyadic
4
competes dyadic
4
meta-accuracy
4
meta-accuracy suggests
4
suggests people
4
people accurately
4
accurately judge
4
judge acquaintances
4

Similar Publications

To what extent do individuals differ in understanding how others see them and who is particularly good at it? Answering these questions about the "good metaperceiver" is relevant given the beneficial outcomes of meta-accuracy. However, there likely is more than one type of the good metaperceiver: One who knows the specific impressions they make more than others do () and one who knows their reputation more than others do ). To identify and understand these good metaperceivers, we introduce the social meta-accuracy model (SMAM) as a statistical and conceptual framework and apply the SMAM to four samples of first impression interactions.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Dyadic interpersonal attraction (IA) was studied within groups of very highly acquainted family members, friends and co-workers. IA was determined by the perceiver (i.e.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • Dyadic meta-accuracy is about how well a person can understand how their partner sees them in a relationship.
  • A study looked at 182 low-income mothers and their teenage daughters to see how mothers' past experiences affected this ability.
  • It found that mothers who had tough childhoods were less accurate in understanding how their daughters felt about them, and this accuracy related to how well they got along.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • Existing research shows people can accurately gauge how much their acquaintances like them, but has only looked at positive feelings.
  • The study introduces the concept of dyadic meta-accuracy in a competitive context, analyzing how well people understand competition among colleagues.
  • Results indicate that while self-projection works for understanding liking, it fails with competition, as competing against better performers often disrupts reciprocal feelings.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!