This article was downloaded by: [Linköping University Library]On: 03 October 2014, At: 01:03Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The Journal of SocialPsychologyPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20

Positive-Negative Asymmetry inthe Evaluation of Trivial StimuliWilco W. van Dijk a , Unna Danner a , Myrke Nieweg a

& Sindy Sumter aa Department of Social Psychology , Free UniversityAmsterdam , The NetherlandsPublished online: 03 Apr 2010.

To cite this article: Wilco W. van Dijk , Unna Danner , Myrke Nieweg & Sindy Sumter(2003) Positive-Negative Asymmetry in the Evaluation of Trivial Stimuli, The Journal ofSocial Psychology, 143:6, 783-784, DOI: 10.1080/00224540309600430

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224540309600430

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lin

köpi

ng U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

03 0

3 O

ctob

er 2

014

The Journal of Social Psychology, 2003, 143(6), 783-784

Replications and Refinements Under this heading are brief reports of studies providing data that substantiate, disprove, or refine what we think we know. These Notes consist of a summary of the study's procedure and as many details about the results as space allows. Addi-

tional details concerning the results can be obtained by communicating directly with the author.

Positive-Negative Asymmetry in the Evaluation of Trivial Stimuli

WILCO W. VAN DIJK UNNA DANNER

MYRKE NIEWEG SINDY SUMTER

Department of Social Psychology, Free University Amsterdam, The Netherlands

WHEN PEOPLE MAKE a series of dichotomous evaluative judgments (such as in the allocation of bipolar trait adjectives to target individuals), they tend to do so asymmetrically, with a greater proportion of positive responses than would be pre- dicted by chance alone. This positive-negative asymmetry effect has been shown to be a robust phenomenon, and some people argue that this asymmetry is a man- ifestation of normal adaptive functioning (see Peeters & Czapinski, 1990, for an overview). Research by, among others, Adams-Webber (1978), Benjafield (1984), and Tuohy and Stradling (1 987) showed that the proportion of positive responses tended to be approximately 60%. That ratio is assumed to approximate an optimal figure-ground relationship between negatives and positives, because it makes the negatives maximally salient against a background of positives. The ratio might have an evolutionary significance. Without a ratio that favors positivity over neg- ativity, an organism might be unmotivated to approach novel objects, stimuli, or contexts. With such a ratio, an organism that faces neutral or unfamiliar stimuli would be weakly motivated to approach and to engage in exploratory behavior. Such a tendency might have important survival value (Cacioppo & Berntson,

Address correspondence to Wilco W. van Dijk, Department of Social Psychology, Free Uni- versity, Van der Boechorststraat 1 , 1081-BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands; send e-mail to ww. van.dijk@psy. vu.nl.

783

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lin

köpi

ng U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

03 0

3 O

ctob

er 2

014

784 The Journal of Social Psychology

1994). If this is the case, then this positive-negative ratio should be robust and be present in the evaluation of trivial stimuli-for example, inanimate objects-with- out criteria for preference. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that when people make evaluative judgments about trivial stimuli (beans), they tend to do so asymmetrically, and the ratio of positive judgments is around 60%.

Participants (40 Dutch college students; 16 men and 24 women) were seated in separate cubicles and given a plastic bag that contained little transparent bags, each bag holding two beans. The task of the participants was to evaluate each pair of beans as either positive or negative. The participants were asked to use their own evaluative criteria for positive and negative. If a pair of beans was evaluated posi- tively, then we asked the participants to put them in the plus box (a sealed non- transparent box with a large "+" on it). If a pair of beans was evaluated negatively, then we asked the participants to put them in the minus box (a sealed nontranspar- ent box with a large "-" on it). Whether the plus box or minus box was placed on the left or right for the participants was randomly determined. The participants were given 5 min to evaluate as many pairs of beans as they could. For each participant, we calculated the ratio of positive to negative evaluations. Analyses did not reveal any gender differences in evaluations. Consequently, gender was not included as a variable in subsequent analyses. Results showed a positive-negative asymmetry in the evaluation of the pairs of beans. The mean ratio was 60% positive evaluations to 40% negative evaluations. That ratio was significantly different from a 50%-50% ratio, t(39) = 4.39, p < .0001. The results of the present study replicated those of earlier studies by showing that when people made a series of dichotomous evalua- tive judgments, they did so asymmetrically, with a greater proportion of positive responses than of negative responses. Furthermore, the present study shows that the ratio of positive to negative responses was about 60%40% and that that ratio was observed even for trivial stimuli without criteria for preference.

REFERENCES

Adams-Webber, J. (1978). A further test of the golden section hypothesis. British Journal of Psychology, 69, 439442.

Benjatield, J. (1984). On the relation between the Pollyanna and the golden section hypotheses. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 83-84.

Cacioppo, J. T., & Berntson, G . G . (1994). Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative sub- strates. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 401423.

Peeters, G., & Czapinski, J. (1990). Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: The dis- tinction between affective and informational negativity effect. In W. Stroebe & M. Hew- stone (Eds.), European Review of Social PsychoZogy (Vol. 1, pp. 33-60). Chichester, England: Wiley.

Tuohy, A. P., & Stradling, S. G . (1987). Maximum salience versus golden section propor- tions in judgmental asymmetry. British Journal of Psychology, 78, 457-464.

Received August 1, 2000 Accepted January 31, 2002

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lin

köpi

ng U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

03 0

3 O

ctob

er 2

014