The current study examines the effects of social comparison information and purpose of appraisal on the leniency and accuracy of self-appraisals of performance. Previous research has shown that providing comparison information decreases the leniency and increases the accuracy of self-appraisals. While these effects of comparison information quantity are documented, no research to date has examined the effects of comparison information quality on self-appraisal. It was hypothesized that self-ratings would be less lenient and more accurate when comparison information was presented via a written medium as opposed to an observational medium. While the results clearly support the role of comparison information quantity, the role of quality was generally not supported. Moreover, there was a discrepancy between the free recall measure and self-ratings with regard to the role of quality of comparison information. Past research indicates that self-appraisals conducted for reward purposes are more lenient and less accurate than those conducted for feedback purposes. The current results provide further support for this trend. Possible explanations for the current results, implications for past research, and suggestions for future research are discussed. / Master of Science