Mastery versus Ability Appraisal: A Developmental Study of Children's Observations of Peers' Work

Abstract

This study was designed to test the hypothesis that there is an age-related shift from mastery enhancement to relative ability assessment in the goal of social comparison. Children at ages 5, 7, and 10 made pictures with stickers under conditions of high or low concern with relative performance (competition/no competition) and high or low procedural ambiguity (free design/copying a drawing). The effects of the manipulations on frequency of glancing at the experimenter and the drawing were similar at all ages; competition enhanced glancing at peers, however, only at ages 7 and 10. The hypothesized shift in the function of social comparison was further supported by age differences in children's explanations for glancing at peers and by the pattern of intercorrelations between glances at the 3 targets and between glances and picture quality. The results indicate how mastery-based comparisons can promote mastery and performance and illustrate some costs older children may pay for their tendency to observe others primarily to assess relative ability.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 71 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.