Our team is conducting operations remotely to promote health and safety during COVID-19, and remains dedicated to providing you with uninterrupted services. We are available to address your technical questions at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Plural societies require individuals to forecast how others—both in-group and out-group members—will respond to gains and setbacks. Typically, greater information results in correction from inaccurate initial forecasts. By contrast to the typical palliative effects of more information, we find that that correcting for targets’ social categories result in more extreme, less accurate forecasts. Forecasters in three experiments exhibited more impact bias in their affective forecasts for in-group and out-group members’ responses to positive and negative outcomes when provided with social categorization information about their target (e.g., a “Democrat” or “Republican”) than when provided with no category information (e.g., a “person”). Inducing time pressure reduced the extremity of forecasts for group-labeled targets but did not affect forecasts for unidentified targets, suggesting that the increased impact bias for identified group members was due to differences in correction rather than in intuitive predictions.
Complete materials used, as well as data and R code, can be found under the corresponding directory for each experiment.
Get more citations
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information,
and information on cookie use.