Is "rejected" feedback really rejected
Effects of informativeness on reactions to positive and negative personality feedback
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19280215 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mitchell M Handelsman (0000-0003-1404-2300, University of Central Missouri, corresponding author), C R Snyder (0000-0002-3341-0490, University of Kansas) |
| Year | 1982 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 168-179 |
| Publication date | 1982-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Personality (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0022-3506 • E-ISSN: 1467-6494 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1982.tb01021.x |
| OpenAlex | W2013572949 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 21 |
Forty-eight undergraduate males completed a psychological test and were told one of two things regarding their test-taking behavior. In one condition, people were led to believe that they had been revealing in their responses (the informative condition); in the other condition, people were given no information about how revealing they had been (the noinformative condition). They were then given a positive or negative personality interpretation concerning assertiveness. The impact of this feedback was measured by feedback recipients’ (a) accuracy and acceptance ratings; (b) recall; and (c) self-descriptive statements in a purportedly independent setting. Positive feedback was rated as more accurate and accepted more than was negative feedback. For subjects who were told that they had been informative, negative feedback tended to be recalled more than was positive feedback. In a purportedly independent experiment, subjects completed questionnaires containing items about their assertiveness. Under the informative condition only, subjects who had received negative feedback rated themselves less favorably than did subjects who had received positive feedback. A possible theoretical reason for the informativeness results is discussed, and implications are drawn for the clinical setting
Assertiveness · Cognitive psychology · Interpretation (philosophy) · Negative feedback · Personality · Positive feedback · Recall · Test (biology) · Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology · Clinical Psychology · Psychological Testing and Assessment · Psychology · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Psychology
Averaging versus adding as a stimulus-combination rule in impression formation.
A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.
Telling more than we can know
Approval Motive and Acceptance of “Fake” Personality Test Interpretations which Differ in Favorability
Student Acceptance of Bogus Personality Interpretations Differing in Level of Social Desirability
Selective exposure to self
Opinion change and performance facilitation as a result of objective self-awareness
Responses to evaluation as a function of initial self-perceptions
The Barnum Effect in a Group Setting
Self-deception
Research Issues in Assertiveness Training
| Citations per year | 0.02 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1985 - 1985 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |