Publikation:

Biased Reasoning : Adaptive Responses to Health Risk Feedback

Vorschaubild

Dateien

Renner_2004.pdf
Renner_2004.pdfGröße: 29.05 MBDownloads: 980

Datum

2004

Autor:innen

Herausgeber:innen

Kontakt

ISSN der Zeitschrift

Electronic ISSN

ISBN

Bibliografische Daten

Verlag

Schriftenreihe

Auflagebezeichnung

URI (zitierfähiger Link)
http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-opus-72747
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203261296
ArXiv-ID

Internationale Patentnummer

Link zur Lizenz
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic

Angaben zur Forschungsförderung

Projekt

Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Open Access Green

Sammlungen

Psychologie: Publikationen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz

Gesperrt bis

Titel in einer weiteren Sprache

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.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache

Fachgebiet (DDC)
150 Psychologie

Schlagwörter

risk perception, expectations, motivation, feedback, reasoning

Konferenz

Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined

Forschungsvorhaben

Organisationseinheiten

Zeitschriftenheft

Zugehörige Datensätze in KOPS

Zitieren

ISO 690RENNER, 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>

Interner Vermerk

xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter

Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.

Prüfdatum der URL

Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation

Finanzierungsart

Kommentar zur Publikation

Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Nein
Begutachtet
Diese Publikation teilen