When Blemishing Leads to Blossoming: The Positive Effect of Negative Information

This research uncovers a counterintuitive effect of negative information, showing that under specifiable conditions people will be more favorably disposed to a product when a small dose of negative information is added to an otherwise positive description. This effect is moderated by processing effort and presentation order, such that the enhanced positive disposition toward the product following negative information emerges when the information is processed effortlessly rather than effortfully and when the negative information follows rather than precedes positive information. Four studies demonstrate this blemishing effect in both lab and field settings and explore the proposed mechanism and boundary conditions.

[1]  A. Kruglanski.  Lay Epistemic Theory , 2012 .

[2]  Derek D. Rucker,et al.  What's in a frame anyway?: A meta-cognitive analysis of the impact of one versus two sided message framing on attitude certainty , 2008 .

[3]  Leandre R. Fabrigar,et al.  Reflecting on Six Decades of Selective Exposure Research: Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities , 2008 .

[4]  Anticipated Group Interaction: Coping with Valence Asymmetries in Attitude Shift , 2007 .

[5]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Addressing Moderated Mediation Hypotheses: Theory, Methods, and Prescriptions , 2007, Multivariate behavioral research.

[6]  I. Choi,et al.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Individual Differences in Analytic versus Holistic Thinking , 2022 .

[7]  C. Judd,et al.  When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. , 2005, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  Lauren G. Block,et al.  When Consumers Don't Recognize 'Benign' Intention Questions as Persuasion Attempts , 2004 .

[9]  R. Petty,et al.  Ease of Retrieval Effects in Persuasion: A Self-Validation Analysis , 2002 .

[10]  Jaideep Sengupta,et al.  Effects of Inconsistent Attribute Information on the Predictive Value of Product Attitudes: Toward a Resolution of Opposing Perspectives , 2002 .

[11]  Lauren G. Block,et al.  Undoing the Effects of Seizing and Freezing: Decreasing Defensive Processing of Personally Relevant Messages , 2002 .

[12]  Chris Hawkins,et al.  Motivation to Think and Order Effects in Persuasion: The Moderating Role of Chunking , 2001 .

[13]  G. Fitzsimons,et al.  Asking questions can change choice behavior: does it do so automatically or effortfully? , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[14]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. , 1998 .

[15]  R. Petty,et al.  The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[16]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Motivated closing of the mind: "seizing" and "freezing". , 1996, Psychological review.

[17]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  On Leaping to Conclusions When Feeling Tired: Mental Fatigue Effects on Impressional Primacy , 1996 .

[18]  Russell H. Fazio,et al.  Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. , 1995 .

[19]  Markus Brauer,et al.  Repetition and evaluative extremity. , 1995 .

[20]  Curtis P. Haugtvedt,et al.  Message Order Effects in Persuasion: An Attitude Strength Perspective , 1994 .

[21]  L. Myaskovsky,et al.  The Easy Path From Many To Much: the Numerosity Heuristic , 1994, Cognitive Psychology.

[22]  Wayne D. Hoyer,et al.  An Integrative Framework for Understanding Two-sided Persuasion , 1994 .

[23]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[24]  I. Simonson,et al.  Experimental Evidence on the Negative Effect of Product Features and Sales Promotions on Brand Choice , 1994 .

[25]  Cornelia Pechmann,et al.  Predicting when Two-Sided Ads will be More Effective than One-Sided Ads: The Role of Correlational and Correspondent Inferences , 1992 .

[26]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[27]  Mike Allen,et al.  Meta‐analysis comparing the persuasiveness of one‐sided and two‐sided messages , 1991 .

[28]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Promoting systematic processing in low-motivation settings: effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[29]  P. Herr,et al.  Effects of Word-of-Mouth and Product-Attribute Information on Persuasion: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Perspective , 1991 .

[30]  Arie W. Kruglanski,et al.  Lay epistemic theory in social-cognitive psychology. , 1990 .

[31]  Jongwon Park,et al.  Mediators of Message Sidedness Effects on Cognitive Structure For Involved and Uninvolved Audiences , 1990 .

[32]  Lawrence J. Marks,et al.  Advertising Puffery: The Impact of Using Two-Sided Claims on Product Attitude and Purchase Intention , 1987 .

[33]  Linda L. Golden,et al.  Comparative analysis of the relative effectiveness of one - and two - sided communication for contra , 1987 .

[34]  Henry Assael,et al.  Two-Sided versus One-Sided Appeals: A Cognitive Perspective on Argumentation, Source Derogation, and the Effect of Disconfirming Trial on Belief Change , 1987 .

[35]  George R. Goethals,et al.  Order effects in impression formation: Attribution context and the nature of the entity. , 1987 .

[36]  R. Cialdini.  Influence: Science and Practice , 1984 .

[37]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  The Effects of Involvement on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality: Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion , 1984 .

[38]  R. Mizerski.  An Attribution Explanation of the Disproportionate Influence of Unfavorable Information , 1982 .

[39]  Michael Etgar,et al.  One-Sided versus Two-Sided Comparative Message Appeals for New Brand Introductions , 1982 .

[40]  S. Chaiken.  Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. , 1980 .

[41]  L. Ross,et al.  Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence , 1979 .

[42]  Shelby D. Hunt,et al.  Attributional Processes and Effects in Promotional Situations , 1978 .

[43]  N. Anderson.  Integration theory and attitude change. , 1971 .

[44]  E. Aronson,et al.  To err is humanizing--sometimes: effects of self-esteem, competence, and a pratfall on interpersonal attraction. , 1970, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[45]  Robert P. Abelson,et al.  Modes of resolution of belief dilemmas , 1959 .

[46]  S. Asch.  Forming impressions of personality. , 1946, Journal of abnormal psychology.