Reactions to undesired outcomes: Evidence for the opposer's loss effect.

IF 6.4 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of personality and social psychology Pub Date : 2025-02-24 DOI:10.1037/pspa0000436
Jacob D Teeny, Richard E Petty
{"title":"Reactions to undesired outcomes: Evidence for the opposer's loss effect.","authors":"Jacob D Teeny, Richard E Petty","doi":"10.1037/pspa0000436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present research identifies a psychological phenomenon that helps to explain how people who prefer the same option to the same degree (e.g., two people equally prefer Politician A over Politician B) can differ in their negativity toward the same undesired outcome (e.g., one person reacts more negatively toward Politician A's defeat). Across multiple domains and a variety of methodologies (e.g., archival, longitudinal, experimental; <i>N</i> = 12,830), we provide evidence for a prevalent phenomenon we label <i>the opposer</i>'s <i>loss</i> <i>effect</i>. When people frame a preference in terms of opposition to the nonpreferred option (\"I'm anti politician B\") versus support for the preferred option (\"I'm pro Politician A\"), it does not change the extremity of their overall preference; however, opposers (vs. supporters) nonetheless report greater negativity to relevant, unwelcome news. As we show, this framing shifts <i>secondary characteristics</i> of the preference, namely, it decreases their feelings of ambivalence in their preference, which amplifies opposers' negativity when that preference is thwarted. Altogether, these findings advance the literature on framing effects, expand the known antecedents to felt ambivalence, and provide practical advice for forecasting negative, mass sentiment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":16691,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality and social psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality and social psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000436","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present research identifies a psychological phenomenon that helps to explain how people who prefer the same option to the same degree (e.g., two people equally prefer Politician A over Politician B) can differ in their negativity toward the same undesired outcome (e.g., one person reacts more negatively toward Politician A's defeat). Across multiple domains and a variety of methodologies (e.g., archival, longitudinal, experimental; N = 12,830), we provide evidence for a prevalent phenomenon we label the opposer's loss effect. When people frame a preference in terms of opposition to the nonpreferred option ("I'm anti politician B") versus support for the preferred option ("I'm pro Politician A"), it does not change the extremity of their overall preference; however, opposers (vs. supporters) nonetheless report greater negativity to relevant, unwelcome news. As we show, this framing shifts secondary characteristics of the preference, namely, it decreases their feelings of ambivalence in their preference, which amplifies opposers' negativity when that preference is thwarted. Altogether, these findings advance the literature on framing effects, expand the known antecedents to felt ambivalence, and provide practical advice for forecasting negative, mass sentiment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.90%
发文量
250
期刊介绍: Journal of personality and social psychology publishes original papers in all areas of personality and social psychology and emphasizes empirical reports, but may include specialized theoretical, methodological, and review papers.Journal of personality and social psychology is divided into three independently edited sections. Attitudes and Social Cognition addresses all aspects of psychology (e.g., attitudes, cognition, emotion, motivation) that take place in significant micro- and macrolevel social contexts.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the psychological and social nature of actual and perceived liking gaps. Reactions to undesired outcomes: Evidence for the opposer's loss effect. Narcissists' experience of ostracism. Stress reactivity and sociocultural learning: More stress-reactive individuals are quicker at learning sociocultural norms from experiential feedback. Money matters for future well-being: A latent growth analysis and meta-analytic integration of associations between income, financial satisfaction, and 22 well-being variables across three data sets.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1