NEGATIVITY BIAS IN ACCEPTANCE OF THE “PEOPLE'S OPINION”

SUSUMU YAMAGUCHI

doi:10.4992/psycholres1954.20.200

SUSUMU YAMAGUCHI

Author information

JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

1978 Volume 20 Issue 4 Pages 200-205

DOI https://doi.org/10.4992/psycholres1954.20.200

Details

Published: March 30, 1979 Received: June 26, 1978 Available on J-STAGE: February 24, 2009 Accepted: - Advance online publication: - Revised: -
Correction information
Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: TITLE Details: [in Japanese]

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: ABSTRACT Details: Wrong : In the present study, it was hypothesized that subjects would accept statements involving people's negative opinion more easily than those involving positive opinion. To examine the hypothesis, a technique developed by Gilson and Abelson (1965) was used: Positive and negative opinions were operationalized as sentence verbs, support and oppose, respectively. Experiment I confirmed the above hypothesis. However, there was no general tendency among subjects to accept negative statements more easily than positive statements. Experiment II seas conducted to examine this point, by using a wide variety of verbs. The result of Experiment II, however, was not conclusive.
Right : In the present study, it was hypothesized that subjects would accept statements involving people's negative opinion more easily than those involving positive opinion. To examine the hypothesis, a technique developed by Gilson and Abelson (1965) was used: Positive and negative opinions were operationalized as sentence verbs, support and oppose, respectively. Experiment I confirmed the above hypothesis. However, there was no general tendency among subjects to accept negative statements more easily than positive statements. Experiment II was conducted to examine this point, by using a wide variety of verbs. The result of Experiment II, however, was not conclusive.

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: AFFILIATION Details: Wrong :
1) Department of Pi eckology, University of Tokyo

Right :
1) Department of Psychology, University of Tokyo

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: CITATION Details: Wrong : ABELSON, R. P., & KANOUSE, D. E. 1966 The subjective acceptance of verbal generalizations. In S. Feldman (Ed.), Cognitive consistency: Motivational antecedents and behavioral consequences. New York: Academic Press. Pp. 171-197.
ANDERSON, N. 1965 Averaging versus adding as a stimulus-combination rule in impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 1-9.
GILSON, C., & ABELSON, R. P. 1965 The subjective use of inductive evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 301-310.
KANOUSE, D. E. 1971 Language, labeling, and attribution. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution : Perceiving the causes of behavior. New York: General Learning Press. Pp. 121-135.
KANOVSE, D. E., & HANSON, L. R., Jr. 1971 Negativity in evaluations. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior. New York: General Learning Press. Pp. 47-61.
KIRK, R. E. 1968 Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral science. Belmont, Calif.: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
PODESCHI, D. M., & WYER, R. S., Jr. 1976 Acceptance of generalizations based on inductive and deductive evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 496-509.

Right : ABELSON, R. P., & KANOUSE, D. E. 1966 The subjective acceptance of verbal generalizations. In S. Feldman (Ed.), Cognitive consistency: Motivational antecedents and behavioral consequences. New York: Academic Press. Pp.171-197.
ANDERSON, N. 1965 Averaging versus adding as a stimulus-combination rule in impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 1-9.
GILSON, C., & ABELSON, R. P. 1965 The subjective use of inductive evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 301-310.
KANOUSE, D. E. 1971 Language, labeling, and attribution. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior. New York: General Learning Press. Pp.121-135.
KANOUSE, D. E., & HANSON, L. R., Jr. 1971 Negativity in evaluations. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior. New York: General Learning Press. Pp.47-61.
KIRK, R. E. 1968 Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral science. Belmont, Calif.: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
PODESCHI, D. M., & WYER, R. S., Jr. 1976 Acceptance of generalizations based on inductive and deductive evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 496-509.

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: PDF FILE Details: -

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: ABSTRACT Details: Wrong : In the present study, it was hypothesized that subjects would accept statements involving people's negative opinion more easily than those involving positive opinion. To examine the hypothesis, a technique developed by Gilson and Abelson (1965) was used: Positive and negative opinions were operationalized as sentence verbs, support and oppose, respectively. Experiment I confirmed the above hypothesis. However, there was no general tendency among subjects to accept negative statements more easily than positive statements. Experiment II was conducted to examine this point, by using a wide variety of verbs. The result of Experiment II, however, was not conclusive.
Right : In the present study, it was hypothesized that subjects would accept statements involving people's negative opinion more easily than those involving positive opinion. To examine the hypothesis, a technique developed by Gilson and Abelson (1965) was used: Positive and negative opinions were operationalized as sentence verbs, support and oppose, respectively. Experiment I confirmed the above hypothesis. However, there was no general tendency among subjects to accept negative statements more easily than positive statements. Experiment II was conducted to examine this point, by using a wide variety of verbs. The result of Experiment II, however, was not conclusive.

Abstract

In the present study, it was hypothesized that subjects would accept statements involving people's negative opinion more easily than those involving positive opinion. To examine the hypothesis, a technique developed by Gilson and Abelson (1965) was used: Positive and negative opinions were operationalized as sentence verbs, support and oppose, respectively. Experiment I confirmed the above hypothesis. However, there was no general tendency among subjects to accept negative statements more easily than positive statements. Experiment II was conducted to examine this point, by using a wide variety of verbs. The result of Experiment II, however, was not conclusive.

Corresponding author

Correction information

Register with J-STAGE for free!