Kollmann Josianne, Nussbeck Fridtjof W, Lages Nadine C, Debbeler Luka J, Schupp Harald T, Renner Britta
Department of Psychology, Psychological Assessment & Health Psychology, University of Konstanz Konstanz, Germany.
Department of Psychology, Methods for Intensive Data in Psychology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.
Health Psychol Behav Med. 2021 Apr 13;9(1):322-337. doi: 10.1080/21642850.2021.1913168.
How do people receive unexpected positive health risk information? While common motivational accounts predict acceptance, consistency accounts such as the cue-adaptive reasoning account (CARA) predict a 'lack of reassurance'.
We therefore tested (1) whether people prefer striving for positivity or retaining a sense of self-consistency ('lack of reassurance'), and (2) if there are systematic differences in short- and long-term reception, which would indicate temporal dynamics in processing.
As part of a longitudinal cohort study, participants of a community health screening (= 1,055) received their actual cholesterol readings. Feedback reception was assessed immediately, at one month and six months.
Processing trajectories for unexpected positive feedback showed a significant 'lack of reassurance' effect over time compared with expected positive feedback, while unexpected negative feedback was less threatening than expected negative feedback.
The perseverance of this 'lack of reassurance' over time indicates that striving for consistency in self-views is a robust phenomenon, even if it means forfeiting a better view of one's own health.
人们如何接收意外的积极健康风险信息？虽然常见的动机理论预测人们会接受，但诸如线索适应性推理理论（CARA）等一致性理论预测会出现“缺乏安心感”。
因此，我们测试了（1）人们是更倾向于追求积极情绪还是保持自我一致性（“缺乏安心感”），以及（2）在短期和长期接收过程中是否存在系统差异，这将表明处理过程中的时间动态。
作为一项纵向队列研究的一部分，社区健康筛查的参与者（=1055人）收到了他们实际的胆固醇读数。在即时、一个月和六个月时评估反馈接收情况。
与预期的积极反馈相比，意外的积极反馈的处理轨迹随着时间的推移显示出显著的“缺乏安心感”效应，而意外的消极反馈比预期的消极反馈威胁性更小。
这种“缺乏安心感”随时间的持续存在表明，即使这意味着放弃对自身健康的更好看法，在自我认知中追求一致性也是一种普遍现象。
