Read the following passage and answer the THREE questions that follow.

A crucial moderating factor in how people experience comparison is self-esteem. Individuals with high self-esteem are more likely to interpret upward comparison as informative rather than threatening. They are more resilient in the face of others’ success and more likely to believe they can improve. In contrast, people with low self-esteem are more prone to interpret comparison as judgment, reinforcing negative self-views and triggering feelings of inadequacy.

This dynamic creates a self-reinforcing loop. People who already doubt their worth are more vulnerable to upward comparison, which intensifies those doubts. Those with a secure sense of self are more likely to use comparison as a learning tool. The same external stimulus—a colleague’s achievement, a peer’s attractiveness, a friend’s popularity—can have radically different effects depending on internal stability.

Self-esteem also influences how people choose their comparison targets. Research has found that individuals often engage in “selective comparison,” seeking out those who confirm their existing beliefs about themselves. This can become a subtle form of self-sabotage. Someone who feels unworthy may unconsciously seek out targets that reinforce that sense, perpetuating a narrative of inferiority. One of the most promising antidotes to social comparison is temporal comparison—evaluating oneself not against others, but against one’s own past. This strategy has been shown to increase motivation and satisfaction, especially when individuals can see concrete progress.

Temporal comparison activates the same reward circuits as social comparison but avoids the threat systems associated with social ranking. It also reinforces agency: individuals focus on what they can control and improve rather than what others possess. In therapeutic and coaching settings, temporal comparison is often used to help clients build self-efficacy and track growth over time.

Moreover, people who focus on self-improvement rather than social dominance are less likely to fall into cycles of envy or self-pity. They can still use others as inspiration, but they do so without attaching their self-worth to the outcome. This is not to say they never compare—but that they compare with awareness and perspective.

The most skilful approach to comparison may lie not in eliminating it, but in reframing it as feedback. When we interpret comparison as information rather than a verdict, we open the door to learning. Instead of asking, “Am I better or worse?” we can ask, “What can I learn from this?” This shift turns others into teachers rather than rivals.

Psychologists emphasize that the key variable here is mindset. A fixed mindset interprets comparison as a threat. If someone else is better, it means we are worse. A growth mindset sees comparison as a map. If someone else has reached a certain level, it means the path exists. This reframing is not just a cognitive trick. It changes the emotional tone of comparison, making it more likely to inspire than to wound.

Reframing also requires emotional regulation—the ability to notice an initial pang of envy or shame without reacting impulsively. With practice, individuals can learn to pause, reflect, and reinterpret their emotional responses. Over time, this builds resilience and self-trust, allowing comparison to become a catalyst rather than a cage.