Do People Devalue Sources of Threatening Health Feedback Particularly When Its Criteria Are Ambiguous and Its Consequences Enduring?
Year: 2020
Type: article
Abstract: We tested the pre-registered hypotheses that receiving threatening health feedback would lead participants to disparage the health-assessment tool used to generate it and that quality of the assessment would moderate this effect. In Studies 1–3, undergraduate students completed a questionnaire including both unambiguous and ambiguous health-assessment items and were randomly assigned to receive either negative health feedback or no feedback. In Study 4, participants were randomly assigned to a control condition or to one of two experimental conditions that entailed receiving negative feedback about enduring or fleeting consequences of their health behaviors. Across all studies, contrary to our predictions, there were no significant effects of feedback on participants’ ratings of the accuracy of the assessment procedures. These findings have implications for understanding the specific conditions under which people disparage sources of threatening feedback in the domain of health.
Source: Collabra Psychology
DOI: 10.1525/collabra.259
Authors: Ashley M. Araiza, Antonio L. Freitas
Institution: Stony Brook University
Language: English
Subfield: General Decision Sciences
Field: Decision Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $975
OpenAlex ID: W3014452613
