Two Explanations for Negativity Effects in Political Behavior

Evidence is provided for two different types of negativity effects in political behavior, a perceptual "figure-ground" negativity based on the greater salience of negative information in a largely positive world, and a motivational "cost orientation" negativity based on the survival value of avoiding costs rather than approaching gains. It is argued that the perception of presidential candidates is affected by both types of negativity effects, but that negativity in congressional elections is based solely on perceptual processes. The implications of these two different types of negativity effects for the future of American politics are discussed.

[1]  P. Slovic.  Differential effects of real versus hypothetical payoffs on choices among gambles. , 1969 .

[2]  K. Motamedi.  The quality of American life , 1976 .

[3]  Arthur H. Miller,et al.  Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970 , 1974, American Political Science Review.

[4]  Susan T. Fiske,et al.  Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. , 1980 .

[5]  L McClelland,et al.  Relative influence of positive and negative information in impression formation and persistence. , 1967, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[6]  Salience and the Cognitive Mediation of Attribution , 1979 .

[7]  J. Mueller,et al.  War, presidents, and public opinion , 1973 .

[8]  Richard R. Lau,et al.  Negativity in political perception , 1982 .

[9]  K. Higbee,et al.  Relationships Among Risk Preferences, Importance, and Control , 1972 .

[10]  G. Jacobson,et al.  The Politics of Congressional Elections , 1983 .

[11]  Mark P. Zanna,et al.  Differential weighting of favorable and unfavorable attributes in impressions of personality. , 1972 .

[12]  A. Beigel.  Resistance to Change: Differential Effects of Favourable and Unfavourable Initial Communications* , 1973 .

[13]  Thomas E. Patterson,et al.  The mass media election , 1980 .

[14]  T. Tyler,et al.  Self-Interest vs. Symbolic Politics in Policy Attitudes and Presidential Voting , 1980, American Political Science Review.

[15]  H. W. Richey,et al.  Negative salience in impressions of character: effects of unequal proportions of positive and negative information. , 1975, The Journal of social psychology.

[16]  Michael J. Robinson.  Public Affairs Television and the Growth of Political Malaise: The Case of “The Selling of the Pentagon” , 1976, American Political Science Review.

[17]  A. Campbell.  SURGE AND DECLINE: A STUDY OF ELECTORAL CHANGE , 1960 .

[18]  W. D. Burnham.  The Changing Shape of the American Political Universe , 1965, American Political Science Review.

[19]  H. Leventhal,et al.  Cognitive complexity, impression formation and impression change1 , 1964 .

[20]  J. Citrin,et al.  Comment: The Political Relevance of Trust in Government , 1974, American Political Science Review.

[21]  Donal E. Carlston,et al.  The recall and use of traits and events in social inference processes , 1980 .

[22]  M. Dermer,et al.  Evaluative judgments of aspects of life as a function of vicarious exposure to hedonic extremes. , 1979 .

[23]  D. O. Sears,et al.  The “Positivity Bias” inEvaluations of Public Figures:Evidence Against Instrument Artifacts , 1979 .

[24]  E. E. Jones,et al.  From Acts To Dispositions The Attribution Process In Person Perception1 , 1965 .

[25]  Margaret W. Matlin.  The Pollyanna principle: Selectivity in language, memory, and thought , 1978 .

[26]  Samuel Kernell,et al.  Presidential Popularity and Negative Voting: An Alternative Explanation of the Midterm Congressional Decline of the President's Party , 1977, American Political Science Review.

[27]  Richard F. Fenno.  Home Style : House Members in Their Districts , 1978 .