1 / 15

Neal Roese Simon Fraser University Ginger Pennington Northwestern University

An Asymmetry in Self-Serving Impact Judgments Reflects Valence-Dependent Processing of Self-Relevant Information. Neal Roese Simon Fraser University Ginger Pennington Northwestern University. Self-Serving Tendencies in Event Impact Judgments.

lilka
Download Presentation

Neal Roese Simon Fraser University Ginger Pennington Northwestern University

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Asymmetry in Self-Serving Impact Judgments Reflects Valence-Dependent Processing of Self-Relevant Information Neal Roese Simon Fraser University Ginger Pennington Northwestern University

  2. Self-Serving Tendencies in Event Impact Judgments • Negative events seen to influence others more than oneself: “Hurts others but not me.” • e.g., crime, weather, tight job market, etc. • Literatures: a) Person-group discrimination discrepancy; b) Third-person effect.

  3. Outline • Judgments of Event Impact • Motivated Self-Serving Patterns • The Valence Asymmetry • Internal vs. External • Valence-Dependent Trait Inference • Three Experiments • Conclusions

  4. Motivated Event Impact Judgments • Effect heightened by threat. • Effect attenuated by self-affirmation. • Effect moderated by trait SE. • (Pennington & Roese, unpublished)

  5. Self-Serving Effects as a Function of Event Valence: Five Tests Effect Size (d)

  6. Valence-Dependent Processing of Self-Relevant Information • Negative: quick heuristic. “Bad = not me = doesn’t affect me.” • Positive: requires consideration of interplay between external forces and internal traits. • “Do sunsets affect me? Well, I’m artistic …” • Multifaceted opportunities to be self-serving; e.g., sensitivity vs. independence.

  7. Study 1 (Fall 2000) • Ratings of event impact: 7-pt scale. • Self vs. other is between-subjects. • Sensitivity items: sunsets, kittens, friends. • Independence items: counseling services, healthcare, social mixers.

  8. Self-Other Contrast as a Function of Traits of Sensitivity vs. Independence Impact Rating

  9. Study 1 (Fall 2000) • Manipulation check worked for sensitivity but not independence. • More complicated pattern of self-serving judgment of positive than negative external events.

  10. Valence-Dependent Processing • Does positive impact judgment differentially prompt access / consideration of self-relevant information from memory? • Use paired judgments: impact rating then trait ascription. • Does positive vs. negative impact judgment facilitate subsequent self inference?

  11. Study 2 (July 2001) • Paired tasks: impact+trait self-ascription. • Target: “I am”: fill in blank. • Prime: Impact vs. Frequency (Control) • Valence: Pos vs. Neg • Total: 40 paired judgments.

  12. Study 2 (July 2001), n=17 Pos, t = 1.81, p = .05 (1-tail) Neg, t = 0.08, p = .47 (1-tail) RT (ms)

  13. Study 3 (Sept 2001) • Goal: replicate with improvements. • Reduced item set to 6 pos, 6 neg. • Total self trait ascriptions: 24 • Prime judgment: 3-pt scale.

  14. Study 3 (Sept 2001), n=20 Pos, t = 1.26, p = .11 (1-tail) Neg, t = 0.40, p = .35 (1-tail) RT (ms)

  15. Conclusions • External impact judgments are unique. • New twist on explication of valence asymmetry in social judgment.

More Related