Hypothesis confirmation: The joint effect of positive test strategy and acquiescence response set.

Hypothesis testers tend to ask hypothesis-consistent questions (i.e., they ask about features more likely under the hypothesis than under the alternative). Targets tend to acquiesce (i.e., they provide more yes than no answers). Because yes answers to hypothesis-consistent questions confirm the hypothesis being tested, hypothesis testers should generate hypothesis-confirming data. In the present study, naive hypothesis testers questioned naive targets about their personality traits and, on the basis of targets' answers, drew conclusions about these traits. As predicted, hypothesis testers tended to ask hypothesis-consistent questions, targets tended to acquiesce, and the data generated were consistent with the hypothesis being tested. On the basis of these data, hypothesis testers drew inferences in line with the hypothesis they were testing. Because hypothesis testers derived their conclusions from hypothesis-confirming data, more diagnostic data resulted in a greater confirmation bias. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social comparison in everyday life.

94 college students recorded details of their social comparisons over 2 wks using a new instrument, the Rochester Social Comparison Record. Major results were (1) comparison direction varied with relationship with the target; (2) precomparison negative mood led more often to upward comparison than to downward comparison, supporting a selective affect–cognition priming model in which dysphoria primes negative thoughts about the self (G. H. Bower, 1991; J. P. Forgas et al, 1990) rather than a motivational self-enhancement model (T. A. Wills, 1981, 1991); (3) upward comparison decreased subjective well-being, whereas downward comparison increased it; and (4) high self-esteem individuals engaged in more self-enhancing comparison. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)