Social comparison is a core element of human life (Festinger, 1954; Mussweiler, 2003; Tajfel, 1981; for a collection, see Suls and Wheeler, 2000). This is because comparing oneself to others is the most favored way people use to evaluate themselves. People choose to compare themselves to others with a variety of goals in mind. Obviously, a major concern would be informational: people like to know where they stand in terms of what they think, feel, or do. Are they simply normal or do they happen to be outrageously below or above widely popular standards? Often, people also rely on social comparison to motivate themselves. If getting a kick out of the comparison is the main goal of the comparison then the comparison target is likely to be some person or some group that fares slightly better. Finally, there could also be an explicit attempt at self-enhancement. By finding comparison others who are sufficiently similar yet also somewhat less knowledgeable, strong or likeable than themselves, people make sure that they will come out of the comparison with a feeling of psychological comfort. In short, people's self-knowledge, motivation, and self-esteem crucially hang on the outcome of dozens of daily comparison operations.

Although initially used in interpersonal theory contexts, the social comparison process also comes across as a major player in an impressive series of social psychology theories that focus on intergroup relations.

This chapter is about the correspondence between the psychology and social reality of devalued group membership. Well-being and the subjective satisfaction with life are, at best, modestly related to the objective conditions in which that life takes place. Often, members of minorities or otherwise devalued groups experience similar levels of self-esteem as members of objectively more privileged groups (for a review, see Crocker and Major, 1989). More surprisingly, they report very low levels of personal discrimination even if they are fully aware of the extent to which their group is discriminated against (Crosby, 1982). Thus, it would appear that they perceive themselves as less vulnerable to discrimination than the average member of their group. This discontinuity between judgments of discrimination for self and group has been called the personal-group discrimination discrepancy or PGDD (Crosby, 1982; Taylor, Wright, and Porter, 1994). It is a very robust effect that is found in a wide variety of devalued groups (Taylor, Wright, Moghaddam, and Lalonde, 1990).

The purpose of this chapter is to elaborate on prior work examining the role of social comparison processes in personal and group judgments of discrimination. Specifically, we consider the different goals and motivations involved in these perceptions and elaborate on the hypothesis that is being tested when personal versus group judgments of discrimination are made. One of the most significant consequences of social comparison activities is that they can alter feelings of entitlement, perceptions of being discriminated against, and the perceived relevance of various social categories.