Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42568154›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of social psychology2026

Contrast bias, not confirmation bias, shapes daily impression updating across social and non-social targets.

Yingjie Li, Jean Daunizeau, Sabine Geurts, Johan Karremans, Fred Hasselman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of social psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yingjie LiBehavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Jean DaunizeauParis Brain Institute (ICM), Paris, France.
Sabine GeurtsBehavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Johan KarremansBehavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Fred HasselmanBehavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous literature on impression updating has paid extensive attention to confirmation bias - the tendency to seek out, favour, interpret or remember information in a way that reinforces existing beliefs. Fewer studies examined the contrast effect/bias in the sequential updating of impressions. Contrast bias occurs when the difference between current beliefs and new information is exaggerated, leading to a stronger shift in evaluation than the new information alone would justify. In this work, we conducted two Ecological Momentary Experiments to capture real-world impression formation and updating on both social (e.g. an employee) and non-social (e.g. a vacation house) targets. We also developed novel computational models of biased impression updating based on parametric distortions of Bayesian ideal observers. Across the two studies, we found that daily impression updating exhibited significant contrast bias, with negative contrast bias exerting a stronger influence than positive ones. Additionally, we found no evidence for differences in impression updating between social and non-social targets. By focusing on within-person impression updating over time, these findings reveal contrast bias as a core dynamic of impression updating, systematically shaping how impressions change in response to inconsistent information.

Indexed as

BiasSocial PerceptionAdultEcological Momentary AssessmentFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Agedcomputational modellingcontrast biascontrast effectimpression updatingsocial non‐social comparison

Identifiers

PMID42568154
PMCPMC13451568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.