结果效价和社会群体成员关系驱动未来结果信念的不对称更新

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2023-04-17 DOI:10.5334/irsp.647
Mihai Dricu, Stephanie Bührer, Dominik A. Moser, Tatjana Aue
{"title":"结果效价和社会群体成员关系驱动未来结果信念的不对称更新","authors":"Mihai Dricu, Stephanie Bührer, Dominik A. Moser, Tatjana Aue","doi":"10.5334/irsp.647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Asymmetrical Update of Beliefs About Future Outcomes is Driven by Outcome Valence and Social Group Membership\",\"authors\":\"Mihai Dricu, Stephanie Bührer, Dominik A. Moser, Tatjana Aue\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/irsp.647\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.647\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.647","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

如果人们收到比预期更好的信息,他们就会急于更新自己的信念,比如感知到的风险,但当证据不利时,他们就不愿意这样做了。在估计未来结果的可能性时,这种不对称的信念更新现象有助于产生和维持个人乐观偏见。在这项研究中,我们调查了不对称信念更新是否也延伸到估计其他个体的未来。具体来说,我们促使受访者评估三种社会目标经历未来积极和消极事件的感知可能性:内群体、温和外群体和极端外群体。然后,我们向受访者提供关于这些事件在一般人群中的基本比率的反馈,并促使他们重新评估他们对所有社会目标的初步估计。被调查者对内群体和温和外群体的积极结果的期望高于消极结果,而对极端外群体的消极结果的期望高于消极结果。我们还发现,信念的不对称更新取决于未来事件和社会目标的效价。对于负面结果,受访者在听到好消息后更新的次数多于听到坏消息后更新的次数,对于温和的外群体而言尤其如此。对于积极的结果,受访者在听到好消息和坏消息后,对内部群体和温和的外部群体都同样更新了他们的信念。然而,对于极端群体外成员来说,他们在听到坏消息后比听到好消息时更容易更新自己的信念。因此,我们的数据揭示了社会刻板印象对他人未来期望的强烈影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Asymmetrical Update of Beliefs About Future Outcomes is Driven by Outcome Valence and Social Group Membership
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
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