The Role of Information-Processing Capacity and Goals in Attitude-Congruent Selective Exposure Effects

Smith, Steven M.; Fabrigar, Leandre R.; Powell, Deborah M.; Estrada, Marie-Joelle

doi:10.1177/0146167207301012

Cited by 37 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, one possibility is that patients selectively attend to physicians who promote their ideal affect, which in turns makes them appear more knowledgeable, competent, and trustworthy. Indeed, people are more likely to attend to cues that are congruent with their motivational goals and attitudes (e.g., Forster & Higgins, 2005; Hamamura, Meijer, Heine, Kamaya, & Hori, 2009; Sakaki, Nga, & Mather, 2013; Smith, Fabrigar, Powell, & Estrada, 2007). Another possibility is that patients find it more rewarding (e.g., enjoyable, satisfying) to interact with physicians whose affective focus matches their ideal affect and, as a result,, they evaluate those physicians as more trustworthy, knowledgeable and competent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients respond more positively to physicians who focus on their ideal affect.

Sims¹,

Tsai

2015

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous findings suggest that patients choose physicians whose affective focus matches how they ideally want to feel (Sims et al., 2014). For instance, the more people wanted to feel excitement, the more likely they were to hypothetically choose a new physician who promoted excitement. What remains unknown is whether this match shapes how patients actually respond to physicians after being assigned to them (i.e., whether they adhere to physicians’ recommendations more and evaluate physicians more positively). To this end, community adults reported their global ideal affect and actual affect (how they ideally want to feel and actually feel during a typical week, respectively), and were randomly assigned to receive health recommendations from either a physician who expressed and promoted high arousal positive states (HAP) (e.g., excitement), or one who expressed and promoted low arousal positive states (LAP) (e.g., calm). For the next five days, participants reported their daily adherence to the recommendations and their daily ideal and actual affect. At the end of the week, participants evaluated their physician. As predicted, the more participants wanted to feel HAP, the more they adhered to the “HAP-focused” physician’s recommendations, and the more participants wanted to feel LAP, the more they adhered to the “LAP-focused” physician’s recommendations. Participants also evaluated their physician more positively when his affective focus matched their ideal affect. Neither global nor daily actual affect systematically predicted how patients responded to their physicians. These findings suggest that patients respond better to physicians whose affective focus matches their ideal affect.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients respond more positively to physicians who focus on their ideal affect.

Sims¹,

Tsai

2015

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, uncongenial information would be more useful for preparing to debate (e.g., Canon, 1964) or to write an uncongenial essay (Hillis & Crano, 1973). Congenial information would be more useful for planning to discuss one's opinion (Canon, 1964; Smith, Fabrigar, Powell, & Estrada, 2007) or to defend one's attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors (Frey, 1981b; Lundgren, & Prislin, 1998). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeling validated versus being correct: A meta-analysis of selective exposure to information.

Hart

Albarracín

Eagly

et al. 2009

Psychological Bulletin

993

814

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A meta-analysis assessed whether exposure to information is guided by defense or accuracy motives. The studies examined information preferences in relation to attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors in situations that provided choices between congenial information, which supported participants' pre-existing attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors, and uncongenial information, which challenged these tendencies. Analyses indicated a moderate preference for congenial over uncongenial information (d. = 0.36). As predicted, this congeniality bias was moderated by variables that affect the strength of participants' defense motivation and accuracy motivation. In support of the importance of defense motivation, the congeniality bias was weaker when participants' attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors were supported prior to information selection, when participants' attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors were not relevant to their values or not held with conviction, when the available information was low in quality, when participants' closed-mindedness was low, and when their confidence in the attitude, belief, or behavior was high. In support of the importance of accuracy motivation, an uncongeniality bias emerged when uncongenial information was relevant to accomplishing a current goal.

show abstract

“…Recent studies have examined the psychological processes underlying selective exposure to particular issues. For example, Smith, Fabrigar, Powell, and Estrada (2007) find that processing motivations and time constraints moderate selective exposure. Brannon, Tagler, and Eagly (2007) demonstrate that attitude strength increases issue-specific exposure.…”

Section: The Study Of Interests and Information: Are Citizens Generalmentioning

confidence: 99%