Introduction
When Obama says his famous catchphrase "Yes, We Can" or Selena Gomez uses her magnum opus, Who Says, which includes encouraging lyrics like "You got every right to a beautiful life," to influence more people, these influencers also demonstrate self-evaluation. Some may consider this self-evaluation a statement of the influencer's belief that they are better than others, which may be considered as the "Better-than-average" effect. This effect usually stems from an individual's innate tendency to perceive themselves as capable, influential, and valuable (Cooppersmith S,1967). Self-efficacy plays an essential role in estimating self-confident. It is people's self-assessment of their abilities. Self-efficacy is also the degree of belief and confidence that people have that they can overcome difficulties and achieve the requirements of the task (Bandura, 1977).

Feeling self is better than half of the people is another exemplification of the better-than-average effect. Overestimation has both advantages and disadvantageous. It not only can sometimes boost people's confidence temporarily but also may cause incorrect self-perception. Nonetheless, people should have an objective view of themselves, which is contribute to healthy mentality. Hence, This essay will discuss what makes up attractiveness, how self-esteem affects our perception of attractiveness, and cross-cultural differences in people's perception of attractiveness.

The Better-Than-Average Effect
The better-than-average effect is a phenomenon in social comparison, where people tend to perceive themselves as better than the median, and several psychological theories can account for the phenomenon. People are constantly comparing themselves with others. Social comparison can be divided into two types—upward comparison and downward comparison. Upward comparison is when we compare ourselves with others better than us, and downward comparison occurs when we compare ourselves with people inferior to us. (Smith, R. H, 2000). The reason why we compare ourselves with others is to form a more objective understanding of ourselves. However, people's perceptions of attractiveness may be prone to bias based on self-knowledge. The better-than-average effect is the reflection of the prejudice of self-knowledge.

The Truth and Bias Model is a common phenomenon that expresses that people desire objective views of themselves while tending to overestimate or underestimate themselves (West, T. V., & Kenny, D. A, 2011). Despite people's desire to be objective in their self-assessment, bias, and stereotype can often lead to overestimation or underestimation, which is disadvantageous for self-perception.

On Attractiveness.
Suitable variants are essential for human survival. Attractiveness is one of the abilities which is a part of the "favorable variants". Attractiveness is the quality of causing interest or making people want to do something. It can be mainly understood from two perspectives; others' perception of attractiveness, and people's own perception. Humans are social animals. Attractiveness can serve an essential role in building up emotional bonds and forming relationships (Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R, 1994). Attractiveness can be shown in two aspects: physical attractiveness, which significantly affects first impressions, and personality, which is socially desirable. Physical attractiveness means that objective comments, such as out looking and height, strongly influence people's impression of others. Furthermore, everyone has different personalities, optimistic or pessimistic, introverted or extroverted. People are attracted by specific kinds of people, which represents subjective comments. Through Anderson's research, More physically attractive men tended to have higher status by investigating physical and person-alogical determinants of status in social groups, and physical appearance is able to be seen as a potential mediator of attaining status. (Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M, 2001). Wade, T. J.'s research indicates that evolutionary biological theory can provide relevant insight for understanding self-perceived attractiveness and self-esteem for African Americans by comparing and investigating the relationship between self-perception, self-esteem, and derived from evolutionary theory. (2003). Hence, people are able to recognize that there are connections between evolutionary theory and self-perceived attractiveness.

Attractiveness would positively correlate with more social connections. For example, in Walster's research, attractiveness is vital and positively correlates with dating behavior. (1966). It may also elaborate confidence and self-esteem. People use attractiveness to pursue a higher social hierarchy. Attractiveness may influence how others treat people and then shape self-reported social status (Rahal, et al., 2021). Research has shown that individuals' status within their group influences personal well-being, social cognition, and emotional experience (Adler et al.- lazzo, & Ickovics, 2000; Barkow, 1975; Eibl-Eibesfeldt, 1989; Fiske, 1993; Keltner, Young, Heerey, Oemig, & Monarch, 1998). Thus, it sets a connection between social hierarchy and self-perception, the higher the status, the more reasons causing higher self-confidence. From the former paragraph, there is the relationship between attractiveness and social status. Therefore, attractiveness can cause high self-confidence.

Self-Esteem
Confidence plays a crucial role in shaping our perception of attractiveness. Leary and Baumeister (2000) presented evidence suggesting that self-esteem is strongly linked to individuals' self-assessments in domains relevant to interpersonal attractiveness. High levels of self-esteem are often associated with increased confidence, and it is a positive state of mind for individuals in life because higher confidence is able to make people feel more brave and more delightful. For example, in one study from Dittes (1959), people who were made to feel well accepted in a group found the group more attractive than those who felt poorly accepted. They have clearly and obviously different opinions of whether the group is exciting and well-organized.

Nevertheless, this difference was significantly more significant among persons with low self-esteem, low self-esteem indicating a more substantial need for acceptance (Dittes, J. E, 1959). Attractiveness may vary among individuals and groups. However, attractiveness among individual and groups describe processes that occur in tandem. Hence, the more the person has a higher attractiveness, the higher the self-esteem.

Self-perception is significant for setting and showing people's attractiveness; indeed, physical appearance may affect self-perceived facial attractiveness, but people need to pay more attention to inner beauty, which is the most extraordinary and precious thing for every individual. Therefore, inner beauty is another dimension of attractiveness, according to Clarke and L. C. H (2002). Overall, both attractiveness and effectiveness of personality were significantly related to the self-esteem of males and females (Thornton et al.; R. M., 1991). Consequently, there is a connection between attractiveness and self-esteem in which higher levels of attractiveness correlate with higher self-esteem. As social animals, humans are influenced by others' perceptions of themselves, which is related to self-esteem. Thus, self-esteem is able to account for people's evaluation of themselves by showing their attractiveness and reflecting the extent of confidence.

Cultural Differences
Cultural differences contribute to different levels of confidence. For example, Leon Mann believes that the conflict model and its attendant coping patterns are relevant for describing and comparing decision-making in both Western and Asian cultures based on his The Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire research. Different decision-making abilities can be related to the self-confidence extent. (Mann, L., Radford, M., Burnett, P., Ford, S., Bond, M., Leung, K., ... & Yang, K. S, 1998). The previous discussion has pointed out the relationship between confidence and perception of attractiveness. Thus, cultural differences may also play a role in terms of self-perceived attractiveness because of different self-admiration extent. Confidence within people has features in different regions because of cultural differences. Take the United States as an example. The concept of the American Dream plays a particular role. It represents the values and social standards people traditionally try to achieve in the US, such as democracy, equal rights, and wealth. The belief that effort leads to success is deeply ingrained in American culture, which might contribute to their confident demeanor (Pless, N., & Maak, T, 2004). This cultural atmosphere made Americans more confident, and soon it became a fashion, American spirit. They are passionate and confident. However, Americans' individual evaluations may have a more powerful effect on self-esteem as compared to collectivist cultures. Tafarodi's research, it shows that the Chinese were lower in self-competence but higher in self-liking than the Americans. (Tafarodi, R. W., & Swann Jr, W. B, 1996).

A comparison between China and the United States can assist in illustrating the cultural difference. In the research, participants from China and the United States, represented educations of tight cultures and loose cultures separately. Shreds of evidence show that the Chinese have increased neuron activities more than Americans when they faced other’s offense simultaneously (Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., ... & Yamaguchi, S, 2011). Therefore, when people are staying in different cultural environment and growing with different education styles, they will have different perspectives and reactive on the same thing. Thus, the difference between Chinese and American cultures is able to mold their disparate opinions of self-perception. People act in different ways and show different extents of confidence and self-esteem in different regions and cultures.

Rethinking and widening
Biased estimation and comparison are not always a good thing, even though it sometimes is beneficial for people’s mental state. Among the surveyed population, participants who made more downward comparisons than upward may have had more subjective self-understanding, which causes a lack of self-confidence and incorrect self-perception. Moreover, upward comparison sometimes results in more negative self-evaluations; Upward social comparison is generally regarded as ego-deflating, yet people often compare themselves with better abilities and attributes. (Collins, R. L, 1996).

Contrary to the Better Than Average Effect, there are many times when people feel below average. In daily life, it is easy for people to lack confidence. A bias, or criticism, and both can be why people lose their passion and self-esteem. Hence, it can be called self-abasement. Self-abasement is a challenge that awaits for people to address, it refers to the negative mentality caused by an individual's experience of their own shortcomings, incompetence or inferiority. It plays an incredible role in the negative part of self-perception. It usually forms because of the distorted perception of people themselves. Self-abasement will cause self-derogation sometimes. It is a coping strategy used to block impulsivity and overcome psychic immobilization, ward off the hostility and aggression of others, and defend against experiences of helplessness, humiliation, and shame. It is a catastrophic product of faulty self-perception and eventually is harmful to people's health, which is extremely difficult to be treated.

Conclusion
Essentially, the findings from surveys demonstrate that more than half of the respondents in the survey believe they are more attractive than the median person in their country is related to the cognition of attractiveness, the better-than-average effect, the cognitive biases humans adapted to protect self-esteem, and individualist tendencies of United States culture. Meanwhile, it is vital to acknowledge the negative phenomenon of self-abasement. Its formation is through incorrect self-perception and evaluation. Based on these analyses and theories, people should have a more objective understanding and view of self, neither overestimate nor underestimate, even though having high self-esteem seems like a good thing sometimes. People need to be objective, people should not jump to conclusions based on their likes and dislikes because sometimes subjectivity is wrong. It does not correspond to the facts.

To form a more objective view of oneself, people can learn more about themselves and increase their intrapersonal knowledge (Zimmerman, B. J, 2013). Both motivating people to be more confident and objectively understanding themselves are valuable and necessary. With the development of technology and society, people are comparing themselves to others more frequently, which might provide them with biased self-perception and unstable mental state, suggesting the importance of cultivating confidence in a healthy manner. Thus, having a balanced approach to self-perception is vital as it will enable people to overcome low-self esteem, have objective comment to ourselves, and embrace a bright future.

Bibliography
Adler, N. E., Epel, E. S., Castellazzo, G., & Ickovics, J. R. (2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy, White women. Health psychology, 19(6), 586.
Anderson, C., Keltner, D., & John, O. P. (2003). Emotional convergence between people over time. Journal of personality and social psychology, 84(5), 1054.
Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of personality and social psychology, 81(1), 116.
Baldwin, M., & Mussweiler, T. (2018). The culture of social comparison. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(39), E9067-E9074.
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Prentice Hall: Englewood cliffs.
Barkow, J. H., Akiwowo, A. A., Barua, T. K., Chance, M. R. A., Chapple, E. D., Chattopadhyay, G. P., ... & Sarles, H. B. (1975). Prestige and culture: a biosocial interpretation [and comments and replies]. Current Anthropology, 16(4), 553-572.
Clarke, L. C. H. (2002). Beauty in later life: Older women's perceptions of physical attractiveness. Canadian Journal on Aging/La revue canadienne du vieillissement, 21(3), 429-442.
Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse: The impact of upward social comparison on self-evaluations. Psychological bulletin, 119(1), 51.
Coopersmith, S. (1965). The antecedents of self-esteem. Princeton.
Dittes, J. E. (1959). Attractiveness of group as function of self-esteem and acceptance by group. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59(1), 77.
Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American psychologist, 48(6), 621.
Gerber, J. P., Wheeler, L., & Suls, J. (2018). A social comparison theory meta-analysis 60+ years on. Psychological bulletin, 144(2), 177.
Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., ... & Yamaguchi, S. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. science, 332(6033), 1100-1104.
Gilbert, D. G., & Connolly, J. J. (Eds.). (2013). Personality, social skills, and psychopathology:An individual differences approach. Springer Science & Business Media.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1994). Attachment as an organizational framework for research on close relationships. Psychological inquiry, 5(1), 1-22.
Keltner, D., Young, R. C., Heerey, E. A., Oemig, C., & Monarch, N. D. (1998). Teasing in hierarchical and intimate relations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 75(5), 1231.
Mann, L., Radford, M., Burnett, P., Ford, S., Bond, M., Leung, K., ... & Yang, K. S. (1998). Cross‐cultural differences in self‐reported decision‐making style and confidence. International journal of psychology, 33(5), 325-335.
Pless, N., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of business ethics, 54, 129-147.
Rahal, D., Fales, M. R., Haselton, M. G., Slavich, G. M., & Robles, T. F. (2021). Cues of Social Status: Associations Between Attractiveness, Dominance, and Status. Evolutionary Psychology, 19(4), 14747049211056160.
Smith, R. H. (2000). Assimilative and contrastive emotional reactions to upward and downward social comparisons. Handbook of social comparison: Theory and research, 173-200.
Thornton, B., & Ryckman, R. M. (1991). Relationship between physical attractiveness, physical effectiveness, and self-esteem: a cross-sectional analysis among adolescents. Journal of adolescence, 14(1), 85-98.
Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottman, L. (1966). Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 4(5), 508.
Wade, T. J. (2003). Evolutionary theory and African American self-perception: Sex differences in body-esteem predictors of self-perceived physical and sexual attractiveness, and self-esteem. Journal of Black Psychology, 29(2), 123-141.
West, T. V., & Kenny, D. A. (2011). The truth and bias model of judgment. Psychological review, 118(2), 357.
Wu, A. D., Liu, Y., Stone, J. E., Zou, D., & Zumbo, B. D. (2017, August). Is difference in measurement outcome between groups differential responding, bias or disparity? A methodology for detecting bias and impact from an attributional stance. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 2, p. 39). Frontiers Media SA.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement, 1-36.
Zell, E., Strickhouser, J. E., Sedikides, C., & Alicke, M. D. (2020). The better-than-average effect in comparative self-evaluation: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 146(2), 118.