• About
    • About
    • What is Public Interest Communications?
    • Our Team
    • Theories We Use
    • What We’ve Shared
    • Center Updates
    • Programs & Affiliates
      • frank gathering
      • The Research Prize in Public Interest Communications
      • Journal of Public Interest Communications
      • UF Programs
    • Contact Us
  • Our Services
    • Strategy Consulting
    • Issue Research
    • Training – Frameworks and Custom
  • Frameworks & Resources
  • Training
  • Case Studies
Center for Public Interest Communications
Support
  • About
    • About
    • What is Public Interest Communications?
    • Our Team
    • Theories We Use
    • What We’ve Shared
    • Center Updates
    • Programs & Affiliates
      • frank gathering
      • The Research Prize in Public Interest Communications
      • Journal of Public Interest Communications
      • UF Programs
    • Contact Us
  • Our Services
    • Strategy Consulting
    • Issue Research
    • Training – Frameworks and Custom
  • Frameworks & Resources
  • Training
  • Case Studies
  • Research & Insights

How Feeling Threatened Biases Our Internet Searches

  • January 4, 2016
  • 3 minute read
Total
0
Shares
0
0
0
0

New research suggests that feeling threatened can lead us to bias our Internet searching towards reassuring, positive information, while potentially ignoring important warning signs.

These results come from a series of experiments conducted by researchers Hannah Greving and Kai Sassenberg and were published in the September 2015 issue of the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. The researchers found that when participants felt threatened, they were more likely to pick out and recall positive information and ignore negative information.

One experiment took saliva samples from 41 undergraduate students to test for a medical intolerance for a (fake) food additive. Some of the participants received feedback that they had the intolerance (creating a threatening situation), while others were told that an error had occurred and they would not be able to receive their analysis (creating a neutral situation).

The participants were then presented with a series of 16 fictional links to web pages with more information about the intolerance. Some of the links contained positive information, such as promising medical treatments and positive side effects, while others contained negative information, such as foods the participants would have to avoid and the possibility of a weakened immune system. Participants were asked to select eight links they would like to investigate further.

The researchers found that participants who felt threatened by a medical food intolerance chose more positive links to view than the participants who had not received a diagnosis. The participants who didn’t feel as anxious chose a more balanced selection of positive and negative links to view.

Another experiment asked 41 undergraduate participants to either “think about a situation or task of your studies that is highly demanding at the moment, and that you are not able to deal with” or a situation “that is highly demanding at the moment but that you are very well able to deal with.”

After describing the stressful situation, participants were asked to learn about living organ donation “as if they were preparing a presentation for class.” They were given a series of 16 short texts and told “that they should read as if these texts were the outcome of their own Internet search.”

Some of the texts described neutral information about organ donation, such as the donating laws. Other texts contained positive information, such as “organ recipient received a second lifetime as a gift.” The remainder of the texts contained negative information, like the possibility of lengthy sick leave required for donors. After a break, participants were asked to write down what they remembered from the texts they read.

The researchers found that the participants who had been primed with a threatening situation that they weren’t able to deal with remembered more positive information about organ donation than the participants who thought about a situation with which they could cope.

“[T]hreatened individuals allocated more attention to positive information (i.e. selected more positive links and looked longer at positive web sites), and acquired more positive knowledge…compared with individuals” who did not feel threatened, the researchers report.

The study suggests that “health-threatened individuals who often use the Internet for health-related information search can represent their health overly optimistically…and may be at risk to make nonoptimal, inappropriate, or even wrong decisions.”

For communicators, then, it’s important to understand that your audience may be subconsciously selecting positive information about a situation when they feel threatened, and avoiding cold, hard truths.

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

Researchers:
Hannah Greving and Adam Fetterman, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Tübingen, Germany
Kai Sassenberg, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Tübingen, Germany, and the University of Tübingen

0
0
0
Total
0
Shares
Share 0
Tweet 0
Share 0
Related Topics
  • frankology
Previous Article
  • Research & Insights

Star Power: How Celebrities Shape Our Understanding of Breast Cancer

  • December 30, 2015
View Post
Next Article
  • Research & Insights

Worth Comparing: “More Than” Statements Are More Persuasive

  • January 6, 2016
View Post
Think we can help with your goals? Read about our services and how we work.
Or reach out today to tell us a bit about your project and inquire how we might help.

 
 

Join our network

We'll send insights and opportunities when you least expect

More of our work
  • How to Tell Stories About Complex Issues
  • Why each side of the partisan divide thinks the other is living in an alternate reality
  • The Science of Belief: Move Beyond “Us” and “Them” to “We”
  • The Secret to Better Storytelling for Social Change: Better Partnerships
Latest from the Center
  • Teresa Gonzales and Nicole Bronzan
    Paper exploring local discursive frames of poverty and race wins 2023 research prize
  • Center welcomes two collaborators in research and strategy
  • 2023 Research Prize Finalists
    Center announces three finalists for the $10,000 public interest communications research prize
  • Rakeem Robinson
    Center honors the memory of colleague Rakeem Robinson
How We Help – Case Studies
  • hands with medicine
    Invest in Trust – a vaccine communications guide for CNAs
  • illustration of hand holding United States flag
    Covering immigration in local news—an exploration by Define American
  • gloved hand holding vial
    Science-based communication strategy on COVID for the UN Verified Initiative

Subscribe

Keep up with our latest; request our periodic newsletter.

UF Logo

Center for Public Interest Communications
PO Box 118400
Gainesville, FL 32611-8400

An auxiliary unit of the College of Journalism and Communications

Copyright © 2022

Contact Us

We are eager to chat with you about your project or training need.

Send us a note

The Center for Public Interest Communications, the first of its kind in the nation, is designed to study, test and apply the science of strategic communication for social change. We are based at the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications.

  • Social Change Communication
  • Science Communication
  • Strategic Communication
  • Broader Impacts
  • Public Interest Communication
  • Narrative Change
  • Leadership Development
  • Strategy Development
  • Effective Presentations
  • Research Translation & Insights

Input your search keywords and press Enter.