Avoiding Anxiety, Being in Denial, or Simply Stroking Self‐Esteem: Why Self‐Positivity?

Abstract

This article studies the presence, resilience, and direction of the self‐positivity bias under various conditions to examine the role of self‐esteem maintenance as an important antecedent for the bias. Experiment 1 manipulates the perceptions of the uncontrollability of cancer and presence of base‐rate information as independent variables that together eliminate the self‐positivity bias in perceptions of the risk of cancer. Experiment 2 shows the same effects using 4 life events that differ in terms of valence and perceived controllability; that is, base‐rate information affects self‐estimates for uncontrollable life events, reducing the self‐positivity bias, but does not affect self‐estimates for controllable events. Experiment 3 shows that these effects only apply to optimistic individuals who fail to incorporate base‐rate information into their self‐perceptions for controllable events. In contrast, pessimists use base rates to update their self‐estimates irrespective of the controllability of the event. Overall, the pattern suggests that self‐positivity is attenuated in conditions that implicate self‐esteem. Implications for health care marketing are discussed.

Self-construal and regulatory focus influences on persuasion: The moderating role of perceived risk

“…Individuals' self-perceptions are oftentimes self-enhancing and positively biased (Taylor & Brown, 1994). Individuals thus consider themselves more invulnerable than others in their health risk estimates, a phenomenon known as the self-positivity bias (Lin, Lin, & Raghubir, 2003;Raghubir & Menon, 1998). In line with prior research, the current findings show that risk perceptions may be enhanced by presenting risks in a day frame to make them seem more concrete, proximate, and probable.…”

Is 1/10 > 10/100? The effect of denominator salience on perceptions of base rates of health risk

“…The higher denominator was the number of deaths overall due to motor vehicle accidents. Given that people have a self-positivity bias whereby they believe that negative things are less likely to happen to them than to others (Raghubir & Menon, 1998), and that this bias is greater for events that are perceived to be more controllable (Lin et al, 2003), it is possible that people's beliefs that they are better drivers than the average person (a controllable event) could have led them to estimate their risk as being lower. Thus, it is important to examine the effect of nominal base rates using identical denominators.…”

“…One such input is the base rate of occurrence of a health risk. The likelihood of a consumer considering this base rate information when judging the risk involved is contingent on individual differences (e.g., levels of optimism and gender; Lin, Lin, & Raghubir, 2003), as well as the time frame used to construct base rates (Chandran & Menon, 2004).…”

The impact of negative affect on responses to affect‐regulatory experiences

“…This motivation could often be manifested in a more careful scrutiny of the situation at hand in an effort to avoid further unpleasantness (Schwarz, Bless, & Bohner, 1991). In addition, it could stimulate an attempt to eliminate the feelings one is experiencing (Duhachek & Oakley, 2007;Lin, Lin, & Raghubir, 2003;Yi & Baumgartner, 2004). In this regard, Lazarus and Folkman (1991) distinguish between problem-focused coping, which is directed toward the elimination of the situation that gave rise to the negative affect one is experiencing, and emotion-focused coping, which is directed toward the reduction of the negative feelings independently of their cause.…”