바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Psychology: General

  • KOREAN
  • P-ISSN1229-067X
  • E-ISSN2734-1127
  • KCI

ISSN : 1229-067X

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.30 No.3

Citation Share

Unrealistic Optimism about Risky Events: Direct versus Indirect Measures and Event Frequency Effect

Korean Journal of Psychology: General / Korean Journal of Psychology: General, (P)1229-067X; (E)2734-1127
2011, v.30 no.3, pp.647-662

(2011). Unrealistic Optimism about Risky Events: Direct versus Indirect Measures and Event Frequency Effect. Korean Journal of Psychology: General, 30(3), 647-662.

Abstract

People tend to believe that they are less likely than the average person to experience negative events. Such unrealistic optimism has been assessed in two ways, direct and indirect measures. Using various risky events, the present studies compared unrealistic optimism in these two methods. Study 1 investigated whether there is difference between these two methods in the magnitude of unrealistic optimism, and in the correlation between unrealistic optimism and major event characteristics-perceived frequency, controllability, severity, availability. The two measures showed significant difference not only in magnitude of unrealistic optimism but also in the correlation between unrealistic optimism and risk characteristics. Studey 2 tested empirically whether event frequency influenced differently in unrealistic optimism of direct and indirect method. The direct method produced stronger unrealistic optimism when an event absolute frequency is low rather than high, which supported the existing egocentrism account. In the indirect method, however, an opposite effect was found, namely, unrealistic optimism was significantly stronger when an event absolute frequency is high rather than low, which showed novel results. The effects of event frequency in direct and indirect method were discussed.

keywords
비현실적 낙관주의, 직접 대 간접 측정방법, 사건 빈도 효과, 자기중심성, 위험사건, Unrealistic optimism, direct vs. indirect measures, event frequency effect, egocentrism, risky events

Reference

1.

Alicke, M. D. (1985). Global self-evaluation as determined by the desirability and controllability of trait adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1621-1630.

2.

Aucote, H. M., & Gold, R. S. (2005). Non-equivalence of direct and indirect measures of unrealistic optimism. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 10, 194-201.

3.

Blanton, H., Axsom, D., McClive, K., & Price, S. (2001). Pessimistic bias in comparative evaluations: A case of perceived invulnerability to the effects of negative life events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1627-1636.

4.

Chambers, J., & Suls, J. (2007). The role of egocentrism and focalism in the emotion intensity bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 618-625.

5.

Chambers, J., & Windschitl, P. D. (2004). Biases in social comparative judgments: The role of nonmotivated factors in above-average and comparative-optimism effects. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 813-838.

6.

Chambers, J., Windschitl, P. D., & Suls, J. (2003). Egocentrism, event frequency, and comparative optimism: When what happens frequently is “more likely to happen to me.” Personality and social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1343-1356.

7.

Eiser, J. R., Pahl, S., & Prins, Y. R. A. (2001). Optimism, pessimism, and the direction of self-other comparison. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 77-84.

8.

Harris, P., Griffin, D. W., & Murray, S. (2008). Testing the limits of optimistic bias: Event and person moderators in a multilevel framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1225-1237.

9.

Helweg-Larsen, M., & Shepperd, J. A. (2001). Do moderators of the optimistic bias affect personal or target estimates? A review of the literature. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 74-95.

10.

Klar, Y., & Giladi, E. E. (1999). Are most people happier than their peers, or are they just happy? Personality and social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 585-594.

11.

Klar, Y., Medding, A., Sarel, D. (1996). Nonunique invulnerability: Singular versus distributional probabilities and unrealistic optimism in comparative risk judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decisions Processes, 67, 229-245.

12.

Klein, C. T. F., & Helweg-Larsen, M. (2002). Perceived control and the optimistic Bias: A meta-analytic review. Psychology and Health, 17, 437-446.

13.

Kruger, J. (1999). Lake Wobegon be gone! The “below average effect” and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 221-232.

14.

Kruger, J., & Burrus, J. (2004). Egocentrism and focalism in unrealistic optimism (and pessimism). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 332-340.

15.

Price, P. C., Pentecost, H. C., & Voth, R. M. (2002). Perceived event frequency and the optimistic bias: Evidence for a two-process model of personal risk judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 242-252.

16.

Rose, J. P., & Windschitl, P. D. (2008). How egocentrism and optimism change in response to feedback in repeated competitions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 210-220.

17.

Rose, J. P., Endo, Y., Windschitl, P. D., & Suls, J. (2008). Cultural differences in unrelaistic optimism and pessimism: The role of egocentrism and direct versus indirect comparison measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1236-1248.

18.

Weinstein, N. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 806-820.

19.

Weinstein, N. D. (1984). Why it won't happen to me: Perceptions of risk factors and susceptibility. Health Psychology, 3, 431-457.

20.

Weinstein, N. D. (1987). Unrealistic optimism about susceptibility to health problems: Conclusions from a community-wide sample. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 10, 481-500.

21.

Weinstein, N. D., & Klein, W. M. (1996). Unrealistic optimism: Present and future. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 1-8.

Korean Journal of Psychology: General

e-Submission OA Policy