Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding the negativity effect: The role of processing focus

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Numerous studies have demonstrated that negative information has a stronger influence on overall impressions than does positive information of equal intensity. Recent attempts to explain this phenomenon with evolutionary arguments show strong potential for predicting how and when the effect will be manifested. This paper tests information-processing implications of one evolutionary perspective (Peeters and Czapinski, 1990), finding general support. In particular, empirical evidence indicates that processing of negative information is relatively less subjective and more integrative in focus than processing of positive information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Fiske, Susan T. (1980) “Attention and Weight in Person Perception: The Impact of Negative and Extreme Behavior”.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38(6) 889–906.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanouse, David E. (1984) “Explaining Negativity Biases in Evaluation and Choice Behavior: Theory and Research”. In Thomas C. Kinnear (ed.),Advances in Consumer Research (vol. 1) (pp. 703–708). Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pechmann Cornelia, and David W. Stewart (1989) “The Multidimensionality of Persuasive Communications: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations.” In Patricia Cafferata and Alice M. Tybout (eds.),Cognitive and Affective Responses to Advertising (pp. 31–65). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peeters, Guido, and Janusz, Czapinski (1990). “Positive-Negative Asymmetry in Evaluations: The Distinction Between Affective and Informational Negativity Effects”European Review of Social Psychology 1, 33–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute. (1990). “The REG Procedure.” InSAS/STAT User's Gude (vol. 2) (pp. 1351–1456). Cary, NC: SAS Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Shelley E. (1991) “Asymmetrical Effects of Positive and Negative Events: The Mobilization-Minimization Hypothesis.”Psychological Bulletin 110(1), 67–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Shelley E., and J.D. Brown. (1988). “Illusion and Well-Being.”Psychological Bulletin 103, 193–210.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing and Management Technology, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Lydia J. Price

Authors
  1. Lydia J. Price
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Price, L.J. Understanding the negativity effect: The role of processing focus. Market Lett 7, 53–62 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00557311

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00557311

Key words

Search

Navigation