Meta-accuracy about potential relationship partners' models of others

We investigated whether people can determine which partners are best able to confirm their self-views. Results suggest that people are able to determine the valence of a potential romantic partner's model of other (i.e., they are meta-accurate). Previous research indicates that people expect to have their specific negative and positive self-views confirmed by partners whose model of other matches the valence of their self-view. In the present study, participants generally sought feedback that was congruent with a partner's model of other. However, men who held positive self-views were not meta-accurate; rather, they sought positive or negative feedback from partners regardless of the valence of the partner's model of other. These gender differences are discussed in terms of differential socialization patterns. Results suggest that people may choose relationship partners who are able to confirm their self-views.     

Seeking self-evaluative feedback: the interactive role of global self-esteem and specific self-views

People who verify a negative self-view expose themselves to criticism and rejection. Because people with low global self-esteem are hurt more by negative feedback than are people with high global self-esteem, the authors predicted that they would be less apt to verify a negative self-view in a more specific domain. Three investigations found support for this hypothesis. In all 3 investigations, high self-esteem participants sought (or tended to seek) self-verifying feedback, even if it was negative, but low self-esteem participants sought (or tended to seek) positive feedback, even if it was nonself-verifying. These findings show that low self-esteem people are especially concerned with self-protection and that global self-esteem and specific self-views interact to guide people's responses to self-evaluative feedback.     

Appearance feedback in intimate relationships: The role of self-verification and self-enhancement

To better understand how body image operates within the context of intimate relationships, we investigated women's responses to appearance feedback from an intimate partner. Participants (N = 192) imagined receiving feedback from their partner that was either consistent with their own appearance self-view (i.e., self-verifying), more positive (i.e., self-enhancing), or less positive (i.e., devaluing), and then provided their affective and cognitive reactions. As expected, women's perceptions of their own appearance moderated their reactions. Women with more negative self-views felt happier with enhancing feedback, but thought that it meant their partner understood them less well. They also felt less happy when they received verifying feedback, but felt more understood by their partners. Thus, women with body image dissatisfaction may find themselves stuck in the “cognitive-affective crossfire” reacting ambivalently whether their partner enhances their appearance or confirms their negative self-views. Further examination of partners’ actual feedback is needed.     

Agreeable fancy or disagreeable truth? Reconciling self-enhancement and self-verification

Three studies asked why people sometimes seek positive feedback (self-enhance) and sometimes seek subjectively accurate feedback (self-verify). Consistent with self-enhancement theory, people with low self-esteem as well as those with high self-esteem indicated that they preferred feedback pertaining to their positive rather than negative self-views. Consistent with self-verification theory, the very people who sought favorable feedback pertaining to their positive self-conceptions sought unfavorable feedback pertaining to their negative self-views, regardless of their level of global self-esteem. Apparently, although all people prefer to seek feedback regarding their positive self-views, when they seek feedback regarding their negative self-views, they seek unfavorable feedback. Whether people self-enhance or self-verify thus seems to be determined by the positivity of the relevant self-conceptions rather than their level of self-esteem or the type of person they are.     

Allure of negative feedback: self-verification strivings among depressed persons.

We propose that people with negative self-views are rejected because they gravitate to partners who view them unfavorably. In relation to nondepressed college students (n = 28), depressives (n = 13) preferred interaction partners who evaluated them unfavorably (Study 1). Similarly, in relation to nondepressives (n = 106), depressives (n = 10) preferred friends or dating partners who evaluated them unfavorably (Study 2). Dysphorics (n = 6) were more inclined to seek unfavorable feedback from their roommates than were nondepressives (n = 16); feedback-seeking activities of dysphorics were also associated with later rejection (Study 3). Finally, people with negative self-views (n = 37) preferentially solicited unfavorable feedback, although receiving such feedback made them unhappy, in comparison with people with positive self-views (n = 42; Study 4). It seems a desire for self-verification compels people with negative self-views to seek unfavorable appraisals.     

The feedback withholding bias: Minority students do not receive critical feedback from evaluators concerned about appearing racist

How can we learn from our mistakes if we're unaware they exist? The present research tested the hypothesis that minority students receive less critical feedback on their written work from evaluators who are primarily externally motivated to inhibit their racial biases. Participants highlighted instances of good/bad writing in essays purportedly written by a White or a minority student. Results of two experiments showed that although participants provided equivalent amounts of positive feedback to both authors, they provided less negative feedback and gave higher grades to minority authors to the extent that they were externally but not internally motivated to respond without prejudice. This finding reveals that stigmatized students sometimes fail to receive the critical feedback necessary to identify areas needing improvement, particularly when evaluators are concerned about appearing prejudiced. The implications for educational equality are discussed.     

Threatened selves and differential prejudice expression by White and Black perceivers

Previous theorizing suggests that often-stigmatized individuals may be just as likely, if not more likely, than infrequently stigmatized individuals to protect self-regard by derogating members of low-status groups after receiving negative feedback from high-status others. Often-stigmatized individuals, however, can discount criticism from these high-status others as reflecting prejudice, thereby making outgroup derogation unnecessary as an esteem-protective strategy. Replicating past research, White participants in Experiment 1 expressed prejudices after receiving negative feedback from a White evaluator; as predicted, however, Black participants did not. In Experiment 2, participants instead received negative feedback from Black evaluators (evaluators more likely to threaten Black participants’ self-regard). Here, contrary to previous theorizing, Black participants expressed prejudices, not toward another low-status group, but toward high-status Whites. In all, findings reveal flaws in previous assumptions that frequently stigmatized individuals may be especially prone to devalue lower-status others after rejection or negative feedback from members of higher-status groups.     

Self-esteem maintenance processes: why low self-esteem may be resistant to change

If most people desire to maximize feelings of self-worth, how do we explain the persistence of low self-esteem? Results from four studies suggest that people with low self-esteem may be less likely to accept positive feedback from themselves than from an outside source but equally likely to accept negative feedback from the self and an outsider. When the self was the source of positive feedback, people high, but not low, in self-esteem incorporated the feedback into their self-views; in contrast, when positive feedback came from a knowledgeable external source, both high and low self-esteem people accepted it. Finally, when self-generated feedback was negative, participants low in self-esteem accepted it. The authors discuss how these findings shed light on the maintenance of low self-esteem.     

Self-verification and contextualized self-views

Whereas most self-verification research has focused on people's desire to verify their global self-conceptions, the present studies examined self-verification with regard to contextualized selfviews-views of the self in particular situations and relationships. It was hypothesized that individuals whose core self-conceptions include contextualized self-views should seek to verify these self-views. In Study 1, the more individuals defined the self in dialectical terms, the more their judgments were biased in favor of verifying over nonverifying feedback about a negative, situation-specific self-view. In Study 2, consistent with research on gender differences in the importance of relationships to the self-concept, women but not men showed a similar bias toward feedback about a negative, relationship-specific self-view, a pattern not seen for global self-views. Together, the results support the notion that self-verification occurs for core self-conceptions, whatever form(s) they may take. Individual differences in self-verification and the nature of selfhood and authenticity are discussed.     

Cultural differences in self-verification: The role of naïve dialecticism

This research presents the first evidence of cultural differences in self-verification and the role of naïve dialecticism in mediating these differences. Chinese, Asian-American, and non-Asian American students completed a series of personality tests, and were presented with bogus feedback that was either self-consistent or self-discrepant, and either positive or negative. Whereas non-Asians self-verified (i.e., tended to exhibit resistance), mainland Chinese and Asian-American participants tended to adjust their self-views when they received (either positive or negative) feedback that contradicted their prevailing self-conceptions. Mediated moderation analyses showed that naïve dialecticism, mediated cultural differences in self-verification.     

On the benefits of misery: self-serving biases in the depressive self-concept

Two survey studies suggested that depressed people react to their acute distress by engaging in self-serving biases and striving to develop positive self-views. Study 1 revealed that whereas most of the specific self-views of depressed persons were relatively negative, their best (most favorable) self-views were just as favorable as the best self-views of nondepressed persons. Moreover, depressed participants reported that they were highly confident of their best self-views and considered these beliefs extremely important. Analyses equating depressed and nondepressed persons for global self-esteem provided even stronger evidence of self-serving biases among the depressed. Specifically, such analyses revealed that depressed persons' best self-views were even more positive than the best self-views of the nondepressed. A 2nd study replicated these effects and provided tentative evidence that downward comparison processes play a role in the development of depressed persons' positive self-views. The theoretical and therapeutic implications of these findings are discussed.     

Attentional bias of students toward negative feedback in bad outcome situations: the mechanism of self-defense

The main goals of the present study were to investigate the effects of outcome valence on attentional bias toward feedback and examine the internal mechanism of self-defense. We systematically manipulated the outcome valence by providing a bogus score in a rational thinking task and recorded the time positive feedback and negative feedback was viewed in experiment 1. We added the intervention of self-affirmation to examine the self-defense mechanism in experiment 2. The results suggest that (1) in good outcome situations, the participants viewed negative feedback longer than positive feedback. There was a tendency to slightly reduce the attention given to negative feedback in bad outcome situations. (2) Self-affirming participants in bad outcome situations increased their viewing time of negative feedback, which supported the activation of defensiveness.     

Emotion and information search in tactical decision-making: Moderator effects of feedback

Information search during decision-making may be influenced both by selective attention and by the criterion used for ceasing to search. When the items searched are themselves emotive, the affective state of the decision-maker may bias these search processes. If an automatic selective attention bias operates, it may produce mood-congruent effects irrespective of context; e.g., negative affect may focus attention on negative items of information. An alternative possibility, suggested by the mood-as-input model, is that the influence of affect on search may depend on how decision-makers understand their emotions within a given context. The present study tested predictions derived from relevant theories of affective bias, using feedback as a means to generate a context of success or failure. Hundred and sixty participants were required to access positive and negative items of information in choosing between different routes for a search-and-rescue mission. Outcomes of choices were manipulated experimentally, so that in one condition participants received mostly positive feedback, and in a second condition participants received mostly negative feedback. Results showed that the feedback manipulation influenced affect, but there was considerable variation in affective state within each condition. Associations between affect and information search were moderated by feedback condition. For example, positive affect was associated with more frequent sampling of positive information in the negative feedback condition, but the association reversed when feedback was positive. Findings were consistent with the mood-as-input hypothesis, but not with an automatic selective attention bias. Context may influence how the decision-maker interprets their affective state.     

Attitude alignment increases trust,respect, and perceived reasoning ability to produce attraction

When others disagree with us, we like them more if they shift their attitude toward ours (i.e., engage in attitude alignment), but why? This article examined the effects of partner attitude alignment on dyadic (trust, inferred attraction) and personal (respect, perceived reasoning ability) evaluations. In two experiments, participants received feedback that imagined (Experiment 1) or real (Experiment 2) partners engaged (vs. did not engage) in attitude alignment; rated partners on trust, inferred attraction, respect (Experiments 1 and 2), and perceived reasoning ability (Experiment 2); and reported attraction. Individuals were more attracted to partners who engaged in attitude alignment because they viewed them as more trustworthy and worthy of respect and as possessing greater reasoning ability. The role of inferred attraction was unclear.     

Self-esteem, self-affirmation, and schadenfreude

In two studies we demonstrated that self-esteem has a negative relationship with schadenfreude toward a high achiever and that this relationship was mediated by the self-threat evoked by this high achiever. Moreover, we showed that this indirect relationship was contingent on an opportunity to affirm the self. When no self-affirmation opportunity was available, low self-esteem participants experienced a stronger self-threat when confronted with a high achiever, and this self-threat increased their schadenfreude, whereas this response was attenuated when they were given an opportunity to self-affirm. These findings indicate that the misfortunes of others can evoke schadenfreude because they provide people with an opportunity to protect or enhance their self-views.     

Self-attribution of attitude as a function of belief feedback

Previous research has found that subjects listening to a communication can be persuaded more when they receive false physiological feedback concerning their emotional state than when such feedback is not presented. Such results, in conjunction with Bem's (1972) postulate that subjects infer their attitude from the external circumstances of their behavior, suggested that false feedback of belief or disbelief would affect persuasion. Subjects listened to a speech while observing their (false) reactions on a "belief meter." Half of the subjects received strong positive belief feedback, and the other half received strong disbelief feedback. Demand characteristics were varied by telling half of the subjects in each group that the meter was highly reliable and valid and the other half that is was of questionable validity. Results showed that the meter feedback affected self-attributions of attitude. Subjects receiving disbelief feedback rated their attitude the same as a control group who merely completed the attitude scale. Subjects receiving belief feedback were persuaded more than a control group receiving only the communication. The implications of the data for the construct of attitude were discussed.     

The contribution of feedback to outcome in long-term group psychotherapy

Two long-term analytic inpatient psychotherapy groups, comprised of severely disturbed neurotic and personality disordered patients, were intensively investigated using process ratings and therapist and patient reports to examine the contribution of interpersonal feedback to treatment outcome. We found that feedback was important throughout the course of therapy, and that patients who derived the most benefit from the groups were those who experienced a greater level of group cohesiveness and were most active in terms of self-disclosure, receipt of feedback, and making significant behavioral modifications within treatment. These successful patients received both positive and negative feedback, primarily from other group members, and worked effectively toward the goals that brought them to treatment.     

Self-control of feedback during motor learning: accounting for the absolute amount of feedback using a yoked group with self-control over feedback

A traditional control group yoked to a group that self-controls their reception of feedback receives feedback in the same relative and absolute manner. This traditional control group typically does not learn the task as well as the self-control group. Although the groups are matched for the amount of feedback they receive, the information is provided on trials in which the individual may not request feedback if he or she were provided the opportunity. Similarly, individuals may not receive feedback on trials for which it would be a beneficial learning experience. Subsequently, the mismatch between the provision of feedback and the potential learning opportunity leads to a decrement in retention. The present study was designed to examine motor learning for a yoked group with the same absolute amount of feedback, but who could self-control when they received feedback. Increased mental processing of error detection and correction was expected for the participants in the yoked self-control group because of their choice to employ a limited resource in the form of a decreasing amount of feedback opportunities. Participants in the yoked with self-control group committed fewer errors than the self-control group in retention and the traditional yoked group in both the retention and time transfer blocks. The results suggest that the yoked with self-control group was able to produce efficient learning effects and can be a viable control group for further motor learning studies.     

Held in contempt: the psychological, interpersonal, and performance consequences of contempt in a work context

Guided by a social function of emotions perspective, the authors examined a model of the psychological, interpersonal, and performance consequences of contempt in a series of 3 experiments that tested the outcomes of being a recipient of contempt in the work domain. In these experiments, participants engaged in a business strategy simulation with a virtual partner-a computer programmed to give contemptuous and other types of feedback. In Study 1, which examined the task performance and interpersonal outcomes of contempt, recipients of contempt had significantly better task performance but also significantly more interpersonal aggressiveness toward their virtual partners compared with recipients of failure, angry, or neutral feedback. Study 2 examined 3 psychological outcomes mediating the contempt-task performance/aggression relationship: self-esteem, returned feelings of contempt, and activation levels. Lowered levels of implicit self-esteem and greater levels of activation significantly mediated the relationship between receiving contempt and task performance, whereas the contempt-aggression relationship was mediated by lowered implicit self-esteem and increased feelings of returned contempt. Study 3 examined status as a moderator of these relationships. Low-status recipients had significantly better task performance than did equal-status recipients, who performed significantly better than did the high-status recipients of contempt. In addition, low-status recipients displayed significantly lower levels of aggression in response to contempt than did equal-status and high-status recipients.     

Influence of feedback modality on sensorimotor adaptation: contribution of visual, kinesthetic, and verbal cues

In 4 studies, the authors tested the contributions of visual, kinesthetic, and verbal knowledge of results to the adaptive control of reaching movements toward visual targets. The same apparatus was used in all experiments, but the procedures differed in the sensory modality of the feedback that participants (N s = 5, 5, 6, and 6, respectively, in Experiments 1, 2, 3, and 4) received about their performances. Using biased visual, proprioceptive, or verbal feedback, the authors introduced a 5 degrees shift in the visuomanual relationship. Results showed no significant difference in the final amount of adaptation to the mismatch: On average, participants adapted to 79% of the perturbation. That finding is consistent with the view that adaptation is a multisensory, highly flexible process whose efficiency does not depend on the sensory channel conveying the error signal.