People select feedback to flatter others, except when they dislike them

People usually try to make other people feel good about themselves, but not when they dislike them. It has discovered a new study by psychologists at the Ananeburg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania, investigating to what extent people promote “positive self-individuals” for total strangers.

Previous research has shown that people get information that helps to increase their own self-knowledge, but not what and when they use the same selection processes, to improve the way other people see themselves, or for whom.

The study “enhancing others through information selection: the event and the establishment of its pre -conditions,” Xi Shane, a research colleague of the Penn, Anenberg School for Communication, Elison Earl, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Michigan, and Dolorus Albarana, Amy Gutman Penn. Inspiration.

Work is Published In Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

Researchers conducted a series of experiments, in which the participants were asked to inform strangers that a personality or intelligence test was either valid or invalid by others. The participants were more likely to inform the candidate that the test was valid when the person performed well, but was invalid when his partner had a poor performance. In other words, he chose to share such information that would increase the positive self-dictators of another person. This happened not only when the selected people were unaware of whether the test was valid or invalid, but also when they knew that the information was false.

Researchers found that the priority remains whether the candidates have expressed positive or negative views about their personality or intelligence, and whether objective information about the test was available or not-it shows that the inspiration to increase others is quite strong. Researchers also asked some participants about their reasons to choose those information and found that their priority was inspired by the desire to please others.

However, this tendency to choose information to please others was only present when the participants believed that their participants had likes or neutral personalities. This disappeared when they believed that the examinees have “reprimand” characteristics. The pattern also disintegrated when the participants were clearly encouraged to provide accurate information.

This means that when the goal was to provide accurate information to those who selected, they selected equal quantity of flattery and ineffective information for others. In particular, he never exposed more uncontrolled than the information of flattery, even when ineffective information was accurate, and was encouraged to provide true response.

Shane, the lead writer of the study, says, “Our participants were inspired by social ideas-they wanted to increase the self-consciousness of other people to make their colleagues feel good. But this was true only when others were considered like or neutral.”

In short, the author writes, people prefer to select the information that pleases others, but distract from this pattern when others are disorganized or when the goal of providing accurate information is made the main.

Reference to the study, Shane says, “There was an anonymous online atmosphere, in which people do not know their partners and should be relatively dislocated with the results of sharing information for the relationship.” People still demanded to increase the self-conscience of others, “There is an important insight about human nature.”