Evaluating the evidence for pancultural self-enhancement

We do not regard the better-than-average effect as 'the only acceptable measure of self-enhancement' (Heine, Kitayama, & Hamamura, 2007b). Rather, we object to meta-analytical inclusion of effects that are incapable of testing the tactical self-enhancement hypothesis. In Investigation 1 of Sedikides, Gaertner, and Vevea (2007a), 12 of the 24 effects involved attributes that were unvalidated for domain (collectivistic vs individualistic): these effects are uninformative. The 12 domain-validated effects supported the hypothesis. In Investigation 2 of Sedikides et al. (2007a), 12 of the 29 effects were deemed irrelevant. None of these effects involved a correlation between: (a) a participant's rating of self and his/her rating of another person; and (b) idiographic importance rating of the comparison attributes. These effects, then, cannot test whether the self-other comparison varies with the personal importance of the comparison attributes. The 17 relevant effects supported the hypothesis. The weight of the evidence points to the panculturality of self-enhancement.