The comparison game

Suls' comment that people are quite capable of drawing assimilative evaluations from upward comparisons reminds me of social histories I've read about early modern Europe, in which nouveau riche merchants buy, or otherwise force, their way into the ranks of the traditional aristocracy, and, at the same time, look on the lower classes with stark horror, for fear that they might instead lose their privileges and fall down to the bottom. (That dynamic also seems relevant to a discussion of our own 'classless' society, but I'll opt against starting that off-topic flame war.)

In terms of Milliways, I'm sure at least some individual players use some private, more-or-less subconscious form of the Proxy Model, when they compare other players' theads with their own. Certainly there is no shortage of players who mourn their own lack of talent (sometimes just out of false modesty, perhaps, but surely sometimes out of sincere self-doubt as well).

Examples of public downward comparisons are harder to find. People might make comparisons at their own expense, but (fortunately) it's not socially acceptable in Milliways to praise your own talent at the expense of others. (Self-praise is possible and, within sharp limits, acceptable, but not if it's done in a relative way.)

Suls' discussion of the three types of opinion is interesting (particularly for his point that only a 'similar expert' will do), but I'm not sure I would be able to drill down to that level of player interaction without moving farther into players' personal lives than I would prefer for this study. Questions of self-evaluation, especially when they may include feelings of superiority or inferiority, should probably be left to experienced researchers.