Reconsidering research on self-humanizing: The importance of mean comparative judgments

Marzena Cypryańska , John B. Nezlek , Aleksandra Jaskółowska , Magdalena Formanowicz


Self-humanization is defined as the tendency to view oneself as more essentially human than others. Researchers have claimed that people attribute human nature traits more strongly to themselves than to others, but not uniquely human traits. In this article we suggest that such claims are based on the misinterpretation of results. Most studies have not presented mean comparative judgments, making it impossible to determine whether people thought they possessed characteristics less strongly or more strongly than the average person. We found that people (N = 256) in Poland, Italy, and Korea perceived themselves as possessing desirable human nature and uniquely human characteristics more than others, as possessing undesirable uniquely human traits less than others, and as similar to others in terms of undesirable human nature characteristics. It seems that being more human than others means possessing some traits more than others and possessing some traits less than others.
Author Marzena Cypryańska (Wydział Psychologii)
Marzena Cypryańska,,
- Wydział Psychologii
, John B. Nezlek (Wydział Zamiejscowy w Poznaniu)
John B. Nezlek,,
- Wydział Zamiejscowy w Poznaniu
, Aleksandra Jaskółowska (Wydział Psychologii)
Aleksandra Jaskółowska,,
- Wydział Psychologii
, Magdalena Formanowicz
Magdalena Formanowicz,,
Journal seriesJournal of Social Psychology, ISSN 0022-4545, (A 20 pkt)
Issue year2017
Publication size in sheets0.65
Keywords in EnglishBTA effect, comparative judgments, direct comparison, self-humanizing
ASJC Classification3207 Social Psychology
Languageen angielski
Nezlek J._Reconsidering_pap_all_2017.pdf 1.21 MB
Additional file
Nezlek J_Reconsidering_osw_2017.pdf 578.47 KB
2017_publ_Oświadczenie_Cypryanska_JSP1-signed.pdf 258.57 KB
Score (nominal)20
Score sourcejournalList
Publication indicators Scopus SNIP (Source Normalised Impact per Paper): 2016 = 0.578; WoS Impact Factor: 2017 = 1.227 (2) - 2017=1.645 (5)
Citation count*3 (2021-02-24)
Share Share

Get link to the record

* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.
Are you sure?