The positive‐negative asymmetry: On cognitive consistency and positivity bias

Peeters, Guido

doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420010405

Cited by 197 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The similarity between Experiment 1 and the positive outcome condition in the present study may indicate that when respondents are asked to evaluate probabilities without context, they provide a predominantly positive context of their own. This is in line with research on the so-called positivity bias in judgment and impression formation, which shows that the default option in evaluation is a positive rather than a negative one (Peeters, 1971). The difference between the negative and the positive conditions further indicates that when people are asked which probability is more valuable, they tend to think in terms of which outcome they prefer.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

Why isp = .90 better thanp = .70? Preference for definitive predictions by lay consumers of probability judgments

Keren

Teigen

2001

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What do people regard as an informative and valuable probability statement? This article reports four experiments that show participants to have a clear preference for more extreme and higher probabilities over less extreme and lower ones. This pattern emerged in Experiment 1, in which no context was provided, and was further explored in Experiment 2 within a positive and a negative context. The findings were further confirmed in Experiment 3, which employed a Bayesian framework with revisions of opinions. Finally, Experiment 4 showed how preference for high probabilities can lead people to prefer an overconfident to a more well-calibrated (accurate) forecaster. The results are interpreted as manifestations of a search for definitive predictions principle, which asserts that high probabilities are preferred to medium ones and often favored over the corresponding complementary low probabilities on the basis of their capacity to predict the occurrence of single outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

Why isp = .90 better thanp = .70? Preference for definitive predictions by lay consumers of probability judgments

Keren

Teigen

2001

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are essentially two main accounts of the PNAE apart from the normative account: the recategorization account (Gardham & Brown, 2001;; and the cognitive account Otten, Mummendey, & Buhl, 1998). The latter account suggests that in adults negative information receives more attention and weight than positive stimuli resulting in lengthier decision-making (Peeters, 1993;Pratto & John, 1991). This more in-depth processing may reduce bias as participants realize the unjust nature of discrimination based upon arbitrary groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of the positive–negative asymmetry effect: in‐group exclusion norm as a mediator of children's evaluations on negative attributes

Rutland

Brown

Cameron

et al. 2006

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2007) Development of the positive-negative asymmetry effect: In-group exclusion norm as a mediator of children's evaluations on negative attributes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37 (1). pp. [171][172][173][174][175][176][177][178][179][180][181][182][183][184][185][186][187][188][189][190] According to social identity theory (SIT: Tajfel & Turner, 1986) intergroup bias is achieved as a result of individual's striving for positive social distinctiveness, in the context of some in-group identification and the salience of an in-group versus out-group categorization. In this account positive distinctiveness can be created independently of the valence of the attributes to be assigned. Recent research has shown that us-them categorization results in less social discrimination when negative rather than positive attributes are allocated between groups (Blanz, Mummendey, & Otten, 1995;Buhl, 1999;Gardham & Brown, 2001;Otten, Mummendey, & Blanz, 1996). This phenomenon has been termed the 'positive-negative asymmetry effect' (PNAE: Mummendey et al., 1992). Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 37, 171-190 (2007) European Journal of Social Psychology Received 15 December 2004 Accepted 16 January 2006The present research examined when and why children might show intergroup bias on positive, but not negative, valence attributions. Significantly, development of the PNAE has been relatively ignored in previous research on children's intergroup attitudes. The findings of a few studies suggest children are sometimes more willing to differentiate between groups on positive attributes and much less reliably show intergroup discrimination on negative attributes (Bennett et al

show abstract

“…Specifically, it suggests that if a given hypothesis or cue was evoked in connection with a given stimulus, the tendency to accept it as a plausible basis for judging the stimulus would be enhanced by mere exposure. For instance, increased liking after exposure to initially neutral stimuli could reflect an incipient 'positivity bias' (Kanouse & Hanson, 1971;Peeters, 1971) made more subjectively plausible through an exposure-based sense of fluency. This analysis is capable of accounting also for increased dislike for initially negative stimuli as a function of exposure (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivational effects in the mere-exposure paradigm

Kruglanski

Freund²,

Bar‐Tal

1996

Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The positive‐negative asymmetry: On cognitive consistency and positivity bias

Abstract: Positivity bias is approached from three viewpoints: (a) 'mere survival' and 'self-actualization'.

Cited by 197 publications

References 21 publications

Why isp = .90 better thanp = .70? Preference for definitive predictions by lay consumers of probability judgments

Why isp = .90 better thanp = .70? Preference for definitive predictions by lay consumers of probability judgments

Development of the positive–negative asymmetry effect: in‐group exclusion norm as a mediator of children's evaluations on negative attributes

Motivational effects in the mere-exposure paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About