The Interaction between Order of Elicitation and Event Controllability on the Self-Positivity Bias.

Abstract

This paper studies the underlying reason behind the selfpositivity bias. As events perceived to be controllable implicate self-esteem more so than less controllable ones, they are more prone to self-positivity effects. On the other hand, as less controllable events do not implicate self-esteem, only when the order-ofelicitation cues comparative (versus absolute) judgments about the self, does the self-positivity effect emerge. When information about “self” is asked first, the bias is attenuated, but when others’estimates are elicited prior to self-estimates, the bias re-emerges even for uncontrollable events. Implications for health marketing are offered.; Across a range of domains, people judge that they are less at risk of a negative event than the general population: “self-positivity”(Perloff and Fetzer 1986), and have a greater likelihood of a positive event occurring than the average person: “unrealistic optimism” (Weinstein 1980). Consumer researchers are increasingly examining self-positivity effects in people’s perceptions of own risk in contexts ranging from AIDS (Raghubir and Menon 1998) and breast cancer (Luce and Kahn 1999) to Hepatitis C (Menon, Block and Ramanathan 2002) and depression (Keller, Lipkus, and Rimer 2002). As reducing the self-positivity bias can favorably affect preventative action, an important consumer welfare goal is to reduce the self-positivity bias. ; Prior research has shown mixed effects regarding key moderators of the self-positivity bias: the perceived controllability of the event, and contextual cues (Helweg-Larsen and Shepperd 2001). Specifically, while the bias has been found to be strong for events perceived to be controllable, there are mixed results for events that are perceived to be uncontrollable (Harris 1996). Context effects, such as order-of-elicitation, have been found by some researchers who demonstrated a stronger self-positivity bias when estimates of an average person were elicited prior to self-estimates (Hoorens and Buunk 1993), though this effect was difficult to replicate (Otten and van der Pligt 1996). ; This paper examines the interactive effects of order-of-elicitation of self- and other- estimates of risk, and perceived controllability of an event, on the self-positivity bias. As events perceived to be controllable implicate self-esteem more so than less controllable ones, they are more prone to self-positivity effects (Weinstein 1980, Lin, Lin, and Raghubir 2003). On the other hand, we argue that as less controllable events do not implicate self-esteem, only when the order-of-elicitation cues comparative (versus absolute) judgments about the self, does the self-positivity effect emerge. When information about “self” is asked first, the bias is attenuated, but when others’ estimates are elicited prior to self-estimates, the bias reemerges even for uncontrollable events. This is because the “otherfirst”order condition, changes the default “self as standard” to an artificial “other as standard.” When the standard of comparison is an “other” person, then even though the events are not within an individual’ control (and do not implicate self-esteem), the process of comparison leads to self-enhancement, and the re-emergence of the self-positivity bias. This paper reconciles conflicting findings regarding controllability, and order-of-elicitation and suggests that the underlying cause of self-positivity is to enhance self-esteem. Implications for health marketing are offered.