ArticleInternational review of social psychology2023
Asymmetrical Update of Beliefs About Future Outcomes is Driven by Outcome Valence and Social Group Membership.
Article in International review of social psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People are eager to update their beliefs, such as a perceived risk, if they receive information that is better than expected but are reluctant to do so when the evidence is unfavourable. When estimating the likelihood of future outcomes, this phenomenon of asymmetrical belief update helps generate and maintain personal optimism bias. In this study, we investigated whether asymmetrical belief update also extends to estimating the future of other individuals. Specifically, we prompted respondents to assess the perceived likelihood of three social targets experiencing future positive and negative events: An in-group, a mild out-group, and an extreme out-group. We then provided the respondents with feedback about the base rates of those events in the general population and prompted them to re-assess their initial estimates for all social targets. Respondents expected more positive than negative outcomes for the in-group and the mild out-group, but more negative outcomes for the extreme out-group. We also found an asymmetrical update of beliefs contingent on the valence of the future event and the social target. For negative outcomes, respondents updated more following good news than bad news, particularly for the mild out-group. For positive outcomes, respondents equally updated their beliefs following good news and bad news for the in-group and the mild out-group. However, they updated their beliefs significantly more following bad news than good news for the extreme out-group member. Our data thus reveal the strong influence of social stereotypes on future expectancies for others.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.