Sad, thus true: Negativity bias in judgments of truth

Hilbig, Benjamin E.

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.012

Cited by 97 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results are comparable to psychology studies that find that negative stimuli have greater psychological impact, are more persuasive, and are seen as more diagnostic of a person's character than positive stimuli (e.g., Lupfer, Weeks, and Dupuis ; Rozin and Royzman ; Hilbig ). This literature suggests that individuals hold internal representations of how a person should typically behave.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 76%

Getting to Know You: Trust Formation in New Interfirm Relationships and the Consequences for Investments in Management Control and the Collaboration

Anderson

Chang

Cheng

et al. 2017

Contemporary Accting Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust is often posited to substitute for management control in interfirm transactions. However, this raises questions of how trust arises in new relationships, and whether trust that is not based on prior experience transacting together is sufficient to persuade managers to forgo investments in management controls. We use an experiment to test whether two features of the early stage of an interfirm relationship influence a buyer's initial trust in a supplier and have consequences for subsequent investments in management controls and in the collaboration. These two features are the autonomy of the buyer's manager to choose a supplier (i.e., delegation of decision-making authority) and the supplier's willingness to share information with the buyer. We find that the buyer manager's initial trust in the supplier is associated positively with both the autonomy to choose the supplier and the supplier's willingness to share information. Information content and supplier characteristics are held constant, so these results are novel and distinct from prior studies of the antecedents of trust. We find that higher initial trust is associated with reduced expenditures for management controls and increased investments in the collaboration. Thus, we conclude that delegation of decisionmaking authority and supplier information-sharing behavior in the early stages of a relationship influence the formation of initial trust, which has real consequences for investments in management control and in the collaboration. *Accepted by Alan Webb. We thank Alan Webb, the two anonymous referees, exp erience visant a d eterminer si deux caract eristiques des pr emices d'une relation intersoci et es influent sur la confiance initiale d'un acheteur dans un fournisseur et ont des r epercussions sur l'investissement ult erieur dans les contrôles de gestion et la collaboration. Ces deux caract eristiques sont l'autonomie du gestionnaire de l'acheteur dans le choix d'un fournisseur (c'est-a-dire la d el egation du pouvoir d ecisionnel) et la volont e du fournisseur de partager l'information. Les auteures constatent que la confiance initiale du gestionnaire de l'acheteur a l'endroit du fournisseur affiche un lien positif avec l'autonomie dans le choix du fournisseur de même qu'avec la volont e du fournisseur de partager l'information. Le contenu en information et les caract eristiques du fournisseur sont maintenus constants, de sorte que ces r esultats sont in edits et distincts de ceux des etudes ant erieures sur les pr ealables a la confiance. Les auteures constatent qu'une plus grande confiance initiale est associ ee a une r eduction des d epenses aff erentes aux contrôles de gestion et a une hausse de l'investissement dans la collaboration. Elles en concluent que la d el egation du pouvoir d ecisionnel et le comportement de partage de l'information du fournisseur aux premiers stades de la relation influent sur la formation initiale de liens de confiance, ce qui a de v eritables retomb ees sur l'investissement dans les contrôles de gestion et dan...

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 76%

Getting to Know You: Trust Formation in New Interfirm Relationships and the Consequences for Investments in Management Control and the Collaboration

Anderson

Chang

Cheng

et al. 2017

Contemporary Accting Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Often anti-vaccine messages are more enticing than positive ones as diseases that are prevented do not make news. In addition, ‘negativity bias’ may result in anti-vaccine information having much more influence than pro-vaccine information, making it easier to lose people’s trust than it is to gain it [26]. Furthermore, recent studies suggest that positive vaccine messages or information about the risks of the disease may not always have the desired effect, reinforcing anti-vaccine sentiments among those who are already hesitant to vaccinate [27, 28].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring pathways for building trust in vaccination and strengthening health system resilience

Ozawa

Paina

Qiu

2016

BMC Health Serv Res

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTrust is critical to generate and maintain demand for vaccines in low and middle income countries. However, there is little documentation on how health system insufficiencies affect trust in vaccination and the process of re-building trust once it has been compromised. We reflect on how disruptions to immunizations systems can affect trust in vaccination and can compromise vaccine utilization. We then explore key pathways for overcoming system vulnerabilities in order to restore trust, to strengthen the resilience of health systems and communities, and to promote vaccine utilization.MethodsUtilizing secondary data and a review of the literature, we developed a causal loop diagram (CLD) to map the determinants of building trust in immunizations. Using the CLD, we devised three scenarios to illustrate common vulnerabilities that compromise trust and pathways to strengthen trust and utilization of vaccines, specifically looking at weak health systems, harmful communication channels, and role of social capital. Spill-over effects, interactions and other dynamics in the CLD were then examined to assess leverage points to counter these vulnerabilities.ResultsTrust in vaccination arises from the interactions among experiences with the health system, the various forms of communication and social capital – both external and internal to communities. When experiencing system-wide shocks such as the case in Ebola-affected countries, distrust is reinforced by feedback between the health and immunization systems where distrust often lingers even after systems are restored and spills over beyond vaccination in the broader health system. Vaccine myths or anti-vaccine movements reinforce distrust. Social capital – the collective value of social networks of community members – plays a central role in increasing levels of trust.ConclusionsTrust is important, yet underexplored, in the context of vaccine utilization. Using a CLD to illustrate various scenarios helped to explore how common health and vaccine vulnerabilities can reinforce and spill over distrust through vicious, reinforcing feedback. Restoring trust requires a careful balance between eliminating vulnerabilities and strengthening social capital and interactions among communication channels.

show abstract

“…As Ito et al (1998) show, negativity bias is already present at very early stages of the evaluative process. Furthermore, negative messages are more influential than positive ones as they are more likely to be believed (Hilbig 2009). Thus, in many dimensions, “[b]ad is stronger than good” (Baumeister et al 2001).…”

Section: The Logic Of Retaliation In Negative Campaigningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Negative Campaigning and the Logic of Retaliation in Multiparty Competition

Dolezal

Ennser‐Jedenastik

Müller

2016

The International Journal of Press/Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extant literature has demonstrated that the logic of retaliation is a core feature of negative campaigning. Attacks by one side induce counterattacks by the other. Yet most research on the interactive nature of negative campaigning is limited to two-party competition and provides little theoretical justification for why political actors should respond to attacks with counterattacks. The present paper addresses these research gaps. We argue that the negativity bias in human information processing and the zero-sum nature of elections make retaliation a rational strategy. Importantly, these arguments also imply that retaliation may not be the only plausible response to attacks in multiparty systems. Rather, parties may prefer to react to attacks from one competitor by attacking another. To grasp empirically how being attacked and attacking are related, we conduct a highly disaggregated time series analysis of such instances while controlling for other factors that may influence actor behavior. Our analyses draw on several thousand party press releases issued during three national election campaigns in Austria, a typical European multiparty system. They show that retaliation is an important strategy also in multiparty politics. Yet in such context, parties do not exclusively follow a tit-for-tat approach but rather display more complex patterns of attack behavior.

show abstract

Sad, thus true: Negativity bias in judgments of truth

Cited by 97 publications

References 22 publications

Getting to Know You: Trust Formation in New Interfirm Relationships and the Consequences for Investments in Management Control and the Collaboration

Getting to Know You: Trust Formation in New Interfirm Relationships and the Consequences for Investments in Management Control and the Collaboration

Exploring pathways for building trust in vaccination and strengthening health system resilience

Negative Campaigning and the Logic of Retaliation in Multiparty Competition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About