Is Good More Alike as Bad? Positive-Negative Asymmetry in the Differentiation Between Options. Study on the Perception of Political Candidates

In our research, we investigate how well people differentiate between a few positive and negative options. Typically, negative entities are said to be more differentiated than their positive counterparts due to higher sensitivity potentially threatening stimuli. Contrary to that, we predict the opposite effect – a better differentiation of positive and not negative options – assuming that apart from being loss-avoidant people are also motivated to choose the best possible alternatives. Additionally, we investigate how positive and negative information affect object evaluation, predicting further asymmetries in object evaluations. In a series three experimental studies set in a political context, participants evaluated candidate profiles that differed in their overall valence. We used a numeric and narrative presentation of candidates as well designed evaluation tasks as either individual or joint assessments. Our findings provided strong evidence for a better differentiation between positive than negative options which was found in all three studies. It turns out that after exceeding a certain, relatively small level of negativity, people do not see any further increase in negativity. The increase in positivity, on the other hand, is more gradual, with greater differentiation among positive options. Our findings are discussed in light of such concepts as cognitive-experiential self-theory and density hypothesis.