Falling on deaf ears
The effects of sender identity and feedback dimension on how people process and respond to negative feedback − An ERP study
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9008002 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Inga K Rösler (0000-0002-4187-8077, Utrecht University, corresponding author), Félice van Nunspeet (0000-0002-6190-9109, Utrecht University), Naomi Ellemers (0000-0001-9810-1165, Utrecht University) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 104 |
| Pages | 104419-104419 |
| Publication date | 2022-09-26 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0022-1031 • E-ISSN: 1096-0465 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104419 |
| OpenAlex | W4297120374 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 9 |
| References cited | 67 |
Social contexts can affect how people respond to feedback from others. We investigated how context information modulates the cognitive processing of feedback messages (i.e., external evaluations of one's character). We manipulated two aspects of (positive and negative) feedback messages: The identity of the sender (ingroup vs. outgroup member), and the dimension (one's competence vs. morality) as focal concern addressed in the feedback. We measured affective and behavioral responses after participants received such feedback (Study 1, N = 194), and additionally recorded an EEG in Study 2 (N = 49). In both studies, participants reported being more emotionally affected by negative feedback from ingroup compared to outgroup senders. Participants in Study 1 also reported to perceive feedback on their morality (vs. competence) as more negative. Complementing these findings, ERP results of Study 2 revealed greater preferential processing (i.e., increased P200) of feedback messages delivered by ingroup rather than outgroup members. Additionally, participants paid less sustained attention to feedback on their morality (vs. competence, as indicated by decreased P300- and LPP-amplitudes), and afterward recalled less morality- (vs. competence-) related feedback messages. The ERP findings were more pronounced for negative compared to positive feedback. These results suggest that subtle cues such as the social group-membership of a sender or the dimension addressed in a feedback message can modulate the cognitive processing of that message. Furthermore, our findings may explain why people are inclined to disregard negative feedback from outgroup senders and on their moral character
Cognition · Cognitive psychology · Communication source · Competence (human resources · Developmental psychology · Ingroups and outgroups · Morality · Negative feedback · Outgroup · Cultural Differences and Values · Neuroscience · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Psychology
Greater effort, greater pain
Sleep deprivation enhances self-protective behavior after negative social feedback
The impact of neuroscience and artificial intelligence on feedback
Threatened by the immoral, challenged by the incompetent
Criticism in a foreign accent does not hurt less
Self-related motivational aspects of hindsight bias in soccer athletes
Overcoming unintended consequences of social impact accountability
Regulating other people’s moral behaviors
Moral and ethical conduct (and their absence) in groups, politics, and society
Emotion, attention, and the ‘negativity bias’, studied through event-related potentials
Regulatory Focus Theory
Emotion and attention
Spontaneous giving and calculated greed
The essential moral self
The Dishonesty of Honest People
Self-Serving Justifications
Updating P300
Social functionalist frameworks for judgment and choice
A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact
Presentation and validation of the Radboud Faces Database
Morality in Groups
On the Importance of Being Moral
Subtlex-Nl
Universal dimensions of social cognition
Measuring emotion
Negativity Bias, Negativity Dominance, and Contagion
Moral Impression Management
An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict
Warmth and Competence as Universal Dimensions of Social Perception
Navigating the social world
Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect
Discourse-based emotional consistency modulates early and middle components of event-related potentials
Morality and behavioural regulation in groups
Negativity and positivity effects in person perception and inference
The threat of moral transgression
Concern for self‐image and social image in the management of moral failure
Outrage towards whom? Threats to moral group status impede striving to improve via out‐group‐directed outrage
Don’t tell me about my moral failures but motivate me to improve
Self-categorisation, commitment to the group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity
It's OK if we say it, but you can't”
You can criticize because you care’
Moral character predominates in person perception and evaluation
Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain
Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others
Fundamental dimensions of social judgment
Bad is Stronger than Good
The Neuroscience of Intergroup Relations
| Unique citing works | 9 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 3 |
| Citation span | 2023 - 2026 (4) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 9 |