Receiving other people’s advice: Influence and benefit

Yaniv, Ilan

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2003.08.002

Cited by 512 publications

(561 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(67 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

506

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2 Thus, as in previous research, informed participants were omitted from Study 2, because their existing convictions about CCS are less likely to be influenced (Yaniv, 2004;Ross & Ward, 1995;Gino & Moore, 2007;Gunther et al, 2009;Richardson et al, 2008;Banas & Rains, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These measures were adapted from communication studies (Fischhoff et al, 2011;Lipkus, 2007) and play a role in responses to corrective advertising, advice taking (Gardner & Berry, 1995;Harvey & Fischer, 1997;Johar, 1996;Johar & Simmons, 2000;Yaniv, 2004;Yaniv & Kleinberger, 2000) and public perceptions of CCS (Palmgren et al, 2004;Huijts et al, 2007;Walquist, Visschers, and Siegrist, 2010).…”

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Study 1, we tested whether people's responses to educational materials about CCS were associated with prior impressions about CCS (Hypothesis 1), and whether that relationship was stronger in individuals with more perceived knowledge Additionally, we also explored potential mediators of the relationship between initial feelings (that were pre-existing in Study 1 or newly manipulated in Study 2) and post-education feelings, including interpretation of communication content, and ratings of trust and quality, as well as knowledge about communication content and confidence in that knowledge. These RUNNING HEAD: Role of initial affective impressions in responses to communications 7 measures were adapted from communication studies (Fischhoff et al, 2011;Lipkus, 2007) and play a role in responses to corrective advertising, advice taking (Gardner & Berry, 1995;Harvey & Fischer, 1997; Johar, 1996; Johar & Simmons, 2000;Yaniv, 2004;Yaniv & Kleinberger, 2000) and public perceptions of CCS (Palmgren et al, 2004;Huijts et al, 2007; Walquist, Visschers, and Siegrist, 2010). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The role of initial affective impressions in responses to educational communications: The case of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS).

Bruin¹,

Wong‐Parodi²

2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emerging technologies promise potential benefits at a potential cost. Developers of educational communications aim to improve people's understanding and to facilitate public debate.However, even relatively uninformed recipients may have initial feelings that are difficult to change. We report that people's initial affective impressions about Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS), a low-carbon coal-based electricity-generation technology with which most people are unfamiliar, influences how they interpret previously validated education materials. As a result, even individuals who had originally self-identified as uninformed persisted in their initial feelings after reading the educational communication --though perseverance of feelings about CCS was stronger among recipients who had originally self-identified as relatively informed (Study 1). Moreover, uninformed recipients whose initial feelings were experimentally manipulated by relatively uninformative pro-CCS or anti-CCS arguments persisted in their New technological developments bring the promise of societal benefits while introducing potential risks. Members of a democratic society face public debates about whether or not to support the implementation of specific technologies. Well-meaning educators may aim to facilitate those public debates by informing people's perceptions through educational communications. Here, we refer to "educational communications" when describing materials that have been designed to provide balanced and accurate information, and that have been tested for their ability to improve people's understanding of the topic under consideration (see for example Fischhoff, Brewer, & Downs, 2011;Morgan, Fischhoff, Bostrom, & Atman, 2002).Yet, it may be difficult to change recipients' feelings about CCS once they have already formed initial impressions, even if they may still have limited knowledge. First impressions are affective in nature, can be formed on the basis of little to no information, guide cognitions and perceptions of risks and benefits, and tend to be difficult to change (Finucane et al., 2000;Zajonc, 1980). Evidence for the perseverance of first impressions comes from three lines of psychological research in which undergraduate participants made hypothetical decisions in carefully controlled experiments. First, research on impression formation has shown a primacy effect, such that people described as intelligent, tall and mean are evaluated more positively than those described as mean, tall, and intelligent (Asch, 1961; for exceptions see Hogarth & Einhorn, 1992). Second, feelings that are evoked by positive or negative performance feedback tend to linger, even after it is disclosed that the feedback has been fabricated (Anderson et al., 1980). Third, psychological experiments have found that false impressions about hypothetical products RUNNING HEAD: Role of initial affective impressions in responses to communications 4 are difficult to change, because participants feel that the original claims are more likely to ring t...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The role of initial affective impressions in responses to educational communications: The case of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS).

Bruin¹,

Wong‐Parodi²

2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Confident individuals are less receptive to advice than unconfident individuals are (e.g., Gino & Moore, 2007;Harvey & Fischer, 1997;Yaniv & Kleinberger, 2000;Yaniv, 2004). As a result, we expect individuals with low confidence in their judgments due to anxiety to weight others' advice more heavily than people with high confidence.…”

Section: Anxiety and Advice-takingmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Individuals weight advice more heavily when advisors are more experienced or more knowledgeable than the decision makers themselves (Goldsmith & Fitch, 1997;Feng & MacGeorge, 2006;Harvey & Fischer, 1997;Sniezek, Schrah, & Dalal, 2004;Yaniv, 2004;Yaniv & Kleinberger, 2000;Yaniv & Milyavsky, 2007). People are similarly more likely to weight advice when advisors express confidence in the quality of their advice (Sniezek & Buckley, 1995;Sniezek & Van Swol, 2001;Tost, Gino, & Larrick, in press;Van Swol & Sniezek, 2005;Yaniv, 1997).…”

Section: Advicementioning

confidence: 99%