Biased Reasoning : Adaptive Responses to Health Risk Feedback

Renner, Britta

Biased Reasoning : Adaptive Responses to Health Risk Feedback

Dateien

Renner_2004.pdfGröße: 29.05 MBDownloads: 837

Datum

2004

Open Access-Veröffentlichung

Open Access Green

Sammlungen

Psychologie

Publikationstyp

Zeitschriftenartikel

Publikationsstatus

Published

Erschienen in

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2004, 30(3), pp. 384-396. Available under: doi: 10.1177/0146167203261296

Zusammenfassung

The present study examined reactions toward repeated self relevant feedback. Participants in a community health screening received feedback about their cholesterol level on two separate occasions. Reactions to the first feedback were examined with regard to feedback valence and expectedness. The findings showed that negative feedback was devalued, but only when it was unexpected. Feedback consistency war incorporated into analyses of the second feedback. Again, results showed that negative feedback was not always devalued-only when it was inconsistent with the first feedback. Furthermore, positive feedback was not unconditionally accepted. When receiving unexpected positive feedback of low consistency, recipients were doubtful about its accuracy. Conversely, expected positive feedback was accepted regardless of its consistency. These results suggest that negative or unexpected positive feedbacks evoke greater sensitivity to feedback consistency, indicating elaborate cognitive processing. Theoretical accounts of these findings are discussed.

Fachgebiet (DDC)

150 Psychologie

Schlagwörter

risk perception, expectations, motivation, feedback, reasoning

Zitieren

ISO 690

RENNER, Britta, 2004. Biased Reasoning : Adaptive Responses to Health Risk Feedback. In: Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2004, 30(3), pp. 384-396. Available under: doi: 10.1177/0146167203261296

BibTex

@article{Renner2004Biase-10423,
  year={2004},
  doi={10.1177/0146167203261296},
  title={Biased Reasoning : Adaptive Responses to Health Risk Feedback},
  number={3},
  volume={30},
  journal={Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin},
  pages={384--396},
  author={Renner, Britta}
}

RDF

<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/10423">
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/10423/1/Renner_2004.pdf"/>
    <dc:contributor>Renner, Britta</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:issued>2004</dcterms:issued>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:creator>Renner, Britta</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">The present study examined reactions toward repeated self relevant feedback. Participants in a community health screening received feedback about their cholesterol level on two separate occasions. Reactions to the first feedback were examined with regard to feedback valence and expectedness. The findings showed that negative feedback was devalued, but only when it was unexpected. Feedback consistency war incorporated into analyses of the second feedback. Again, results showed that negative feedback was not always devalued-only when it was inconsistent with the first feedback. Furthermore, positive feedback was not unconditionally accepted. When receiving unexpected positive feedback of low consistency, recipients were doubtful about its accuracy. Conversely, expected positive feedback was accepted regardless of its consistency. These results suggest that negative or unexpected positive feedbacks evoke greater sensitivity to feedback consistency, indicating elaborate cognitive processing. Theoretical accounts of these findings are discussed.</dcterms:abstract>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:title>Biased Reasoning : Adaptive Responses to Health Risk Feedback</dcterms:title>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/10423/1/Renner_2004.pdf"/>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/10423"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-03-25T09:17:27Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
    <dc:rights>Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic</dc:rights>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-03-25T09:17:27Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:bibliographicCitation>First publ. in: Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 30 (2004), 3, pp. 384-396</dcterms:bibliographicCitation>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Universitätsbibliographie

Nein