Pub Date : 2023-12-01Epub Date: 2023-08-17DOI: 10.1037/xap0000483
Bastiaan T Rutjens, Coen A Ackers, Gerben A van Kleef
After a transgression, people often use neutralizations to account for their behavior, for instance, by apologizing or offering a justification. Previous research has mostly centered around the intrapersonal effects of neutralizations on actors. Consequently, we know very little of the interpersonal effects of neutralizations on observers' perceptions and judgments. Our overarching hypothesis is that neutralizations that contain an acknowledgment of wrongdoing (i.e., apologies and excuses) lead to more favorable perceptions of the transgressor and the transgression than neutralizations that do not (i.e., justifications). We report three studies (N = 800) to investigate the relationship between the type of neutralization used and observers' perceptions of actors and their behaviors. Our findings show that actor and behavior are evaluated differently depending on whether the neutralization used is an apology, an excuse, a consequentialist justification, or a deontological justification. Overall, justifications led to more negative evaluations (especially when invoking deontological reasoning), while apologies and excuses fostered more positive evaluations. We discuss the implications of these findings for understanding the social dynamics of norm violations and the social and legal implications for enforcing norm abidance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
在犯错之后,人们通常会使用中和法对自己的行为做出解释,例如道歉或提供正当理由。以往的研究大多集中于中和对行为人的人际影响。因此,我们对中和对观察者感知和判断的人际影响知之甚少。我们的首要假设是,包含承认错误行为的中和(即道歉和辩解)比不包含承认错误行为的中和(即辩解)更能使人们对违法者和违法行为产生好感。我们报告了三项研究(N = 800),以调查所使用的中和类型与观察者对行为者及其行为的看法之间的关系。我们的研究结果表明,对行为人和行为的评价因其所使用的中和方式是道歉、借口、结果论辩护还是去义务论辩护而有所不同。总体而言,辩解会导致更多的负面评价(尤其是在援引去道德主义推理时),而道歉和借口则会促进更多的正面评价。我们将讨论这些发现对理解违反规范的社会动态以及强制遵守规范的社会和法律意义的影响。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"I am (not) sorry: Interpersonal effects of neutralizations after a transgression.","authors":"Bastiaan T Rutjens, Coen A Ackers, Gerben A van Kleef","doi":"10.1037/xap0000483","DOIUrl":"10.1037/xap0000483","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>After a transgression, people often use neutralizations to account for their behavior, for instance, by apologizing or offering a justification. Previous research has mostly centered around the intrapersonal effects of neutralizations on actors. Consequently, we know very little of the <i>interpersonal</i> effects of neutralizations on observers' perceptions and judgments. Our overarching hypothesis is that neutralizations that contain an acknowledgment of wrongdoing (i.e., apologies and excuses) lead to more favorable perceptions of the transgressor and the transgression than neutralizations that do not (i.e., justifications). We report three studies (<i>N</i> = 800) to investigate the relationship between the type of neutralization used and observers' perceptions of actors and their behaviors. Our findings show that actor and behavior are evaluated differently depending on whether the neutralization used is an apology, an excuse, a consequentialist justification, or a deontological justification. Overall, justifications led to more negative evaluations (especially when invoking deontological reasoning), while apologies and excuses fostered more positive evaluations. We discuss the implications of these findings for understanding the social dynamics of norm violations and the social and legal implications for enforcing norm abidance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":" ","pages":"831-848"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10005536","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-01Epub Date: 2023-08-17DOI: 10.1037/xap0000489
Marlene Sophie Altenmüller, Lorenz Kampschulte, Laura Verbeek, Mario Gollwitzer
In an attempt to display themselves as warm, approachable, and trustworthy, researchers might reveal personal details about themselves (i.e., self-disclosure) when communicating their science to the public. Here, we test whether self-disclosure in science communication can actually increase public trust in science. We present six online experiments (overall N = 2,431), integrate their results in a mini meta-analysis, and report a field experiment in a science museum (N = 480): In sum, our findings suggest that self-disclosure leads to small, but measurable increases in laypeople's feelings of closeness toward researchers and perceptions of researchers' warmth-related trustworthiness; yet, self-disclosure also leads to decreases in competence-related trustworthiness perceptions. The credibility of scientific findings was, overall, unaffected by self-disclosing communication. Findings from the field study further question whether self-disclosure in science communication has any practical relevance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Science communication gets personal: Ambivalent effects of self-disclosure in science communication on trust in science.","authors":"Marlene Sophie Altenmüller, Lorenz Kampschulte, Laura Verbeek, Mario Gollwitzer","doi":"10.1037/xap0000489","DOIUrl":"10.1037/xap0000489","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In an attempt to display themselves as warm, approachable, and trustworthy, researchers might reveal personal details about themselves (i.e., self-disclosure) when communicating their science to the public. Here, we test whether self-disclosure in science communication can actually increase public trust in science. We present six online experiments (overall <i>N</i> = 2,431), integrate their results in a mini meta-analysis, and report a field experiment in a science museum (<i>N</i> = 480): In sum, our findings suggest that self-disclosure leads to small, but measurable increases in laypeople's feelings of closeness toward researchers and perceptions of researchers' warmth-related trustworthiness; yet, self-disclosure also leads to decreases in competence-related trustworthiness perceptions. The credibility of scientific findings was, overall, unaffected by self-disclosing communication. Findings from the field study further question whether self-disclosure in science communication has any practical relevance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":" ","pages":"793-812"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10005537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-01Epub Date: 2023-03-27DOI: 10.1037/xap0000470
Jason Bush, Marci S DeCaro, Daniel A DeCaro
Society's most pressing problems involve social dilemmas, yet few individuals recognize and understand their core components. We examined how a serious social dilemma game used in an educational setting impacted understanding of a classic social dilemma, the tragedy of the commons. Participants (N = 186) were randomly assigned to one of two gameplay conditions or a Lesson-Only condition without the game (traditional lesson with a reading). In the Explore-First condition, participants played the game as an exploratory learning activity before the lesson. In the Lesson-First condition, participants played the game after the lesson. Both gameplay conditions were rated as more interesting than the Lesson-Only condition. However, participants in the Explore-First condition exhibited higher conceptual understanding and spontaneous transfer to real-world dilemmas than the other conditions, which did not differ. These benefits were selective to social concepts (e.g., self-interest, interdependency) explored via gameplay. These benefits did not occur for ecological concepts (e.g., scarcity, tragedy), which were taught to everyone during the beginning instructions. Policy preferences were equal across conditions. Serious social dilemma games offer a promising educational tool for conceptual development when students can explore the complexities of social dilemmas for themselves. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Playing a social dilemma game as an exploratory learning activity before instruction improves conceptual understanding.","authors":"Jason Bush, Marci S DeCaro, Daniel A DeCaro","doi":"10.1037/xap0000470","DOIUrl":"10.1037/xap0000470","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Society's most pressing problems involve social dilemmas, yet few individuals recognize and understand their core components. We examined how a serious social dilemma game used in an educational setting impacted understanding of a classic social dilemma, the tragedy of the commons. Participants (<i>N</i> = 186) were randomly assigned to one of two gameplay conditions or a Lesson-Only condition without the game (traditional lesson with a reading). In the Explore-First condition, participants played the game as an exploratory learning activity before the lesson. In the Lesson-First condition, participants played the game after the lesson. Both gameplay conditions were rated as more interesting than the Lesson-Only condition. However, participants in the Explore-First condition exhibited higher conceptual understanding and spontaneous transfer to real-world dilemmas than the other conditions, which did not differ. These benefits were selective to social concepts (e.g., self-interest, interdependency) explored via gameplay. These benefits did not occur for ecological concepts (e.g., scarcity, tragedy), which were taught to everyone during the beginning instructions. Policy preferences were equal across conditions. Serious social dilemma games offer a promising educational tool for conceptual development when students can explore the complexities of social dilemmas for themselves. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":" ","pages":"725-746"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9177417","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-01Epub Date: 2023-03-06DOI: 10.1037/xap0000463
Luke Strickland, Russell J Boag, Andrew Heathcote, Vanessa Bowden, Shayne Loft
We applied a computational model to examine the extent to which participants used an automated decision aid as an advisor, as compared to a more autonomous trigger of responding, at varying levels of decision aid reliability. In an air traffic control conflict detection task, we found higher accuracy when the decision aid was correct, and more errors when the decision aid was incorrect, as compared to a manual condition (no decision aid). Responses that were correct despite incorrect automated advice were slower than matched manual responses. Decision aids set at lower reliability (75%) had smaller effects on choices and response times, and were subjectively trusted less, than decision aids set at higher reliability (95%). We fitted an evidence accumulation model to choices and response times to measure how information processing was affected by decision aid inputs. Participants primarily treated low-reliability decision aids as an advisor rather than directly accumulating evidence based on its advice. Participants directly accumulated evidence based upon the advice of high-reliability decision aids, consistent with granting decision aids more autonomous influence over decisions. Individual differences in the level of direct accumulation correlated with subjective trust, suggesting a cognitive mechanism by which trust impacts human decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
我们应用了一个计算模型来研究在不同的决策辅助可靠性水平下,与更自主的触发响应相比,参与者在多大程度上使用自动决策辅助作为顾问。在一项空中交通管制冲突检测任务中,我们发现与手动条件(无决策辅助)相比,当决策辅助正确时,准确率更高,而当决策辅助不正确时,错误率更高。尽管自动建议不正确,但正确的反应却比匹配的人工反应慢。与可靠性较高(95%)的辅助决策相比,可靠性较低(75%)的辅助决策对选择和反应时间的影响较小,主观信任度也较低。我们对选择和反应时间建立了一个证据积累模型,以衡量决策辅助工具输入对信息处理的影响。参与者主要将可靠性低的决策辅助工具视为顾问,而不是根据其建议直接积累证据。参与者根据高可靠性决策辅助工具的建议直接积累证据,这与赋予决策辅助工具对决策更多自主影响是一致的。直接积累水平的个体差异与主观信任度相关,这表明信任度影响人类决策的认知机制。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Automated decision aids: When are they advisors and when do they take control of human decision making?","authors":"Luke Strickland, Russell J Boag, Andrew Heathcote, Vanessa Bowden, Shayne Loft","doi":"10.1037/xap0000463","DOIUrl":"10.1037/xap0000463","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We applied a computational model to examine the extent to which participants used an automated decision aid as an advisor, as compared to a more autonomous trigger of responding, at varying levels of decision aid reliability. In an air traffic control conflict detection task, we found higher accuracy when the decision aid was correct, and more errors when the decision aid was incorrect, as compared to a manual condition (no decision aid). Responses that were correct despite incorrect automated advice were slower than matched manual responses. Decision aids set at lower reliability (75%) had smaller effects on choices and response times, and were subjectively trusted less, than decision aids set at higher reliability (95%). We fitted an evidence accumulation model to choices and response times to measure how information processing was affected by decision aid inputs. Participants primarily treated low-reliability decision aids as an advisor rather than directly accumulating evidence based on its advice. Participants directly accumulated evidence based upon the advice of high-reliability decision aids, consistent with granting decision aids more autonomous influence over decisions. Individual differences in the level of direct accumulation correlated with subjective trust, suggesting a cognitive mechanism by which trust impacts human decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":" ","pages":"849-868"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10821255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Previous research shows that posing many questions about an event may lead to asking questions about unwitnessed details and that people sometimes provide substantive and erroneous answers to them. Therefore, two experiments investigated the role of the problem-solving and judgment processes, which are unrelated to memory access, in improving responding to unanswerable questions. Experiment 1 compared the effects of a brief retrieval training with the effects of an instruction to increase the criterion of reporting. As expected, the two manipulations had different effects on participants' answers, which demonstrates that training can do more than just instigate more cautious responding. However, we found evidence against our prediction that an enhancement in metacognitive ability underlies improved responding after training. Experiment 2 investigated, for the first time, the role of constant awareness that questions can be unanswerable and that such questions should be rejected. We compared the effects of training with the effects of a small change in response format that ensured such awareness. The effects of the two manipulations were similar, which supports our prediction that the constant awareness of unanswerable questions is a key factor behind improved responding. Practical implications for the eyewitness memory domain are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"\"It was not mentioned\": Improving responses to unanswerable questions using retrieval instructions.","authors":"Ewa Skopicz-Radkiewicz, Monika Derda, Agnieszka Niedźwieńska","doi":"10.1037/xap0000473","DOIUrl":"10.1037/xap0000473","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous research shows that posing many questions about an event may lead to asking questions about unwitnessed details and that people sometimes provide substantive and erroneous answers to them. Therefore, two experiments investigated the role of the problem-solving and judgment processes, which are unrelated to memory access, in improving responding to unanswerable questions. Experiment 1 compared the effects of a brief retrieval training with the effects of an instruction to increase the criterion of reporting. As expected, the two manipulations had different effects on participants' answers, which demonstrates that training can do more than just instigate more cautious responding. However, we found evidence against our prediction that an enhancement in metacognitive ability underlies improved responding after training. Experiment 2 investigated, for the first time, the role of constant awareness that questions can be unanswerable and that such questions should be rejected. We compared the effects of training with the effects of a small change in response format that ensured such awareness. The effects of the two manipulations were similar, which supports our prediction that the constant awareness of unanswerable questions is a key factor behind improved responding. Practical implications for the eyewitness memory domain are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":" ","pages":"761-781"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9410444","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-01Epub Date: 2023-04-06DOI: 10.1037/xap0000469
Carlee Beth Hawkins, Nicole Lofaro, Emily Umansky, Kate A Ratliff
Can people learn about implicit bias through an online course? We developed a brief (∼30 min) online educational program called Understanding Implicit Bias (UIB) consisting of four modules: (a) what is implicit bias? (b) the Implicit Association Test, (c) implicit bias and behavior, and (d) what can you do? In Experiment 1, we randomly assigned 6,729 college students across three separate samples to complete dependent measures before (control group) or after (intervention group) the UIB program. In Experiment 2, we randomly assigned 389 college students to complete the UIB program (intervention group) or two TED talks (control group) before dependent measures. Compared to control groups, the intervention groups had significantly higher objective knowledge about bias (ds = 0.39, 1.49) and subjective knowledge about bias (ds = 1.43, 2.61), awareness of bias (ds = 0.10, 0.54), and behavioral intentions to reduce bias (ds = 0.19, 0.84). These differences were again observed at a 2-week follow-up. These results suggest that brief online education about bias can affect knowledge and awareness of bias, as well as intentions to change behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Understanding implicit bias (UIB): Experimental evaluation of an online bias education program.","authors":"Carlee Beth Hawkins, Nicole Lofaro, Emily Umansky, Kate A Ratliff","doi":"10.1037/xap0000469","DOIUrl":"10.1037/xap0000469","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Can people learn about implicit bias through an online course? We developed a brief (∼30 min) online educational program called Understanding Implicit Bias (UIB) consisting of four modules: (a) what is implicit bias? (b) the Implicit Association Test, (c) implicit bias and behavior, and (d) what can you do? In Experiment 1, we randomly assigned 6,729 college students across three separate samples to complete dependent measures before (control group) or after (intervention group) the UIB program. In Experiment 2, we randomly assigned 389 college students to complete the UIB program (intervention group) or two TED talks (control group) before dependent measures. Compared to control groups, the intervention groups had significantly higher objective knowledge about bias (<i>d</i>s = 0.39, 1.49) and subjective knowledge about bias (<i>d</i>s = 1.43, 2.61), awareness of bias (<i>d</i>s = 0.10, 0.54), and behavioral intentions to reduce bias (<i>d</i>s = 0.19, 0.84). These differences were again observed at a 2-week follow-up. These results suggest that brief online education about bias can affect knowledge and awareness of bias, as well as intentions to change behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":" ","pages":"887-902"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9258368","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Market Mindset Can Increase Allocations in the Trust Game Through Proportional Thinking","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/xap0000499.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000499.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":"51 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135874977","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Weighting Ratings: Are People Adjusting for Bias in Extreme Reviews?","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/xap0000497.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000497.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":"65 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136018709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supplemental Material for Us Versus Them: The Role of National Identity in the Formation of False Memories for Fake News","authors":"","doi":"10.1037/xap0000498.supp","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000498.supp","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":"281 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136018718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The increasing importance of consumer ratings raises the question of whether people adjust for potentially fake or biased extreme opinions when judging products. Two studies tested treatments that trimmed the extremes of rating distributions. Neither removing extreme ratings while preserving the mean, nor flagging suspicious extreme ratings, nor priming individuals about review manipulation significantly affect judged product quality on average. However, judgments for specific distributions may be made less extreme by flagging or trimming. On average, it is difficult to override usage of the mean rating as the strongest proxy for product quality. When a weighted-mean model is fitted, the estimated weighting profile is hump-shaped and asymmetric. Consumers appear to discount 5-star ratings but are particularly susceptible to being misled by disingenuous 1-star ratings. The weights suggest that there is a binary bias with an inflection point at 2-stars for product ratings, meaning that any rating above this broadly sends an equally strong positive signal of quality. Further theoretical work is required to understand how people form weights for ratings, and applied work should continue to search for decision aids that could help consumers to better adjust for review bias. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
{"title":"Weighting ratings: Are people adjusting for bias in extreme reviews?","authors":"Neel Ocean","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.4245795","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4245795","url":null,"abstract":"The increasing importance of consumer ratings raises the question of whether people adjust for potentially fake or biased extreme opinions when judging products. Two studies tested treatments that trimmed the extremes of rating distributions. Neither removing extreme ratings while preserving the mean, nor flagging suspicious extreme ratings, nor priming individuals about review manipulation significantly affect judged product quality on average. However, judgments for specific distributions may be made less extreme by flagging or trimming. On average, it is difficult to override usage of the mean rating as the strongest proxy for product quality. When a weighted-mean model is fitted, the estimated weighting profile is hump-shaped and asymmetric. Consumers appear to discount 5-star ratings but are particularly susceptible to being misled by disingenuous 1-star ratings. The weights suggest that there is a binary bias with an inflection point at 2-stars for product ratings, meaning that any rating above this broadly sends an equally strong positive signal of quality. Further theoretical work is required to understand how people form weights for ratings, and applied work should continue to search for decision aids that could help consumers to better adjust for review bias. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48003,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83120463","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}