Negativity is contagious, study finds

Oct 04, 2007

Though we may not care to admit it, what other people think about something can affect what we think about it. This is how critics become influential and why our parents’ opinions about our life choices continue to matter, long after we’ve moved out. But what kind of opinions have the most effect" An important new study in the Journal of Consumer Research reveals that negative opinions cause the greatest attitude shifts, not just from good to bad, but also from bad to worse.

“Consumer attitudes toward products and services are frequently influenced by others around them. Social networks, such as those found on Myspace and Facebook suggest that these influences will continue to be significant drivers of individual consumer attitudes as society becomes more inter-connected,” explain Adam Duhachek, Shuoyang Zhang, and Shanker Krishnan (all of Indiana University). “Our research seeks to understand the conditions where group influence is strongest.”

Consumers were presented with information about a new product and allowed to independently form their evaluations. As would be normally expected with many products, some of these evaluations were positive and others negative. The researchers then revealed to participants whether their peers evaluated the product negatively or positively. They found that the opinions of others exert especially strong influence on individual attitudes when these opinions are negative. Additionally, consumers that privately held positive attitudes toward the product were more susceptible to influence from group opinion than those who initially held negative opinions.

Furthermore, the researchers also found that those with negative opinions of the product were likely to become even more negative if asked to participate in a group discussion: “When consumers expect to interact with other consumers through these forums, learning the views of these other consumers may reinforce and even polarize their opinions, making them more negative,” the researchers reveal.

“This research has several interesting implications. First, given the strong influence of negative information, marketers may need to expend extra resources to counter-act the effects of negative word of mouth in online chatrooms, blogs and in offline media. Conversely, companies could damage the reputations of competitors by disseminating negative information online,” the researchers explain. “Consumers should be aware that these social influence biases exist and are capable of significantly impacting their perceptions.”

Source: University of Chicago

Explore further: Bribery 'hits 1.6 billion people a year'

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Japan clocks keep time for 16 billion years

13 minutes ago

Japanese researchers have built a pair of clocks which they say are so accurate they will lose a second only every 16 billion years—longer than the Earth has been around.

Quantum many-body systems on the way back to equilibrium

17 minutes ago

Considering that one cubic centimetre of matter already contains about 1019 to 1023 particles, it is hard to imagine that physicists nowadays can prepare ensembles comprising only some hundred, or even just ...

Better monitoring for energy efficiency in buildings

20 minutes ago

The past five years have seen energy efficiency in buildings moving from a welcomed addition to a sector priority. Unfortunately, well-defined targets do not always translate in effective measures: gaps between ...

Engineering a robot that assists in direct nursing care

20 minutes ago

Scientists from RIKEN and Sumitomo Riko Company Limited have developed a new experimental nursing care robot, ROBEAR, which is capable of performing tasks such as lifting a patient from a bed into a wheelchair ...

Recommended for you

Bribery 'hits 1.6 billion people a year'

Feb 27, 2015

A total of 1.6 billion people worldwide – nearly a quarter of the global population – are forced to pay bribes to gain access to everyday public services, according to a new book by academics at the Universities of Birmingham ...

How music listening programmes can be easily fooled

Feb 26, 2015

For well over two decades, researchers have sought to build music listening software that can address the deluge of music growing faster than our Spotify-spoilt appetites. From software that can tell you ...

Nature journal to begin offering double-blind peer review

Feb 23, 2015

Well known and respected journal, Nature, will begin next month offering researchers who submit their work for peer review, the option of having it done via the double-blind method—whereby both submitters and re ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

HarryStottle
not rated yet Oct 12, 2007
This is also particularly important for those of us trying to argue for the introduction of democracy and, in particular, the primacy of dissent, which, we argue, should take precedence over assent

a) because it takes more courage to say "No" if all around you are enthusiastic supporters. We can therefore reasonably assume that the objection is sincere.

b) because dissenters often ask the relevant questions that supporters try to ignore or gloss over and

c) because the simple existence of dissent is an important indicator of Liberty.

Now it seems that - as usual - Nature got there before us and has equipped us all with a "dissent amplifier". Interesting...

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.