Political ideology shapes the amplification of the accomplishments of disadvantaged vs. advantaged group members.

Recent years have witnessed an increased public outcry in certain quarters about a perceived lack of attention given to successful members of disadvantaged groups relative to equally meritorious members of advantaged groups, exemplified by social media campaigns centered around hashtags, such as #OscarsSoWhite and #WomenAlsoKnowStuff. Focusing on political ideology, we investigate here whether individuals differentially amplify successful targets depending on whether these targets belong to disadvantaged or advantaged groups, behavior that could help alleviate or entrench group-based disparities. Study 1 examines over 500,000 tweets from over 160,000 Twitter users about 46 unambiguously successful targets varying in race (white, black) and gender (male, female): American gold medalists from the 2016 Olympics. Leveraging advances in computational social science, we identify tweeters' political ideology, race, and gender. Tweets from political liberals were much more likely than those from conservatives to be about successful black (vs. white) and female (vs. male) gold medalists (and especially black females), controlling for tweeters' own race and gender, and even when tweeters themselves were white or male (i.e., advantaged group members). Studies 2 and 3 provided experimental evidence that liberals are more likely than conservatives to differentially amplify successful members of disadvantaged (vs. advantaged) groups and suggested that this is driven by liberals' heightened concern with social equality. Addressing theorizing about ideological asymmetries, we observed that political liberals are more responsible than conservatives for differential amplification. Our results highlight ideology's polarizing power to shape even whose accomplishments we promote, and extend theorizing about behavioral manifestations of egalitarian motives.

Attitudes Based on Feelings: Fixed or Fleeting?

Researchers and practitioners want to create opinions that stick. Yet whereas some opinions stay fixed, others are as fleeting as the time it takes to report them. In seven longitudinal studies with more than 20,000 individuals, we found that attitudes based more on emotion are relatively fixed. Whether participants evaluated brand-new Christmas gifts or one of 40 brands, the more emotional their opinion, the less it changed over time, particularly if it was positive. In a word-of-mouth linguistic analysis of 75,000 real-world online reviews, we found that the more emotional consumers are in their first review, the more that attitude persists when they express it again even years later. Finally, more emotion-evoking persuasive messages create attitudes that decay less over time, further establishing emotion's causal effect. These effects persist above and beyond other attitude-strength attributes. Interestingly, we also found that lay individuals generally fail to appreciate the relation between emotionality and attitude stability.

From trust in caregivers' support to exploration: The role of openness to negative affect and self-regulation.

Attachment theory assumes that trust in caregivers' support and exploration are closely related. Little research tried to investigate this link, nor focuses on mechanisms that might explain this association. The present studies examined whether trust is related to exploration through a serial indirect effect of openness to negative affect and self-regulation. In Study 1, 212 children, aged 8-13, completed questionnaires assessing trust, openness to negative affect, self-regulation and exploration. The results showed that trust predicted exploration, but only to the extent to which openness to negative affect and self-regulation were involved too. Study 2 refined these findings (n = 59, aged 9-12) using a behavioral measure of openness to negative affect and exploration, and with mother-reported self-regulation. Replicating this serial indirect effect of openness to negative affect and self-regulation with multiple informants and methods, the present studies advance our understanding of how trust might foster exploration in preadolescence.

Persuasion, Emotion, and Language: The Intent to Persuade Transforms Language via Emotionality.

Persuasion is a foundational topic within psychology, in which researchers have long investigated effective versus ineffective means to change other people's minds. Yet little is known about how individuals' communications are shaped by the intent to persuade others. This research examined the possibility that people possess a learned association between emotion and persuasion that spontaneously shifts their language toward more emotional appeals, even when such appeals may be suboptimal. We used a novel quantitative linguistic approach in conjunction with controlled laboratory experiments and real-world data. This work revealed that the intent to persuade other people spontaneously increases the emotionality of individuals' appeals via the words they use. Furthermore, in a preregistered experiment, the association between emotion and persuasion appeared sufficiently strong that people persisted in the use of more emotional appeals even when such appeals might backfire. Finally, direct evidence was provided for an association in memory between persuasion and emotionality.

The Evaluative Lexicon 2.0: The measurement of emotionality, extremity, and valence in language.

The rapid expansion of the Internet and the availability of vast repositories of natural text provide researchers with the immense opportunity to study human reactions, opinions, and behavior on a massive scale. To help researchers take advantage of this new frontier, the present work introduces and validates the Evaluative Lexicon 2.0 (EL 2.0)-a quantitative linguistic tool that specializes in the measurement of the emotionality of individuals' evaluations in text. Specifically, the EL 2.0 utilizes natural language to measure the emotionality, extremity, and valence of evaluative reactions and attitudes. The present article describes how we used a combination of 9 million real-world online reviews and over 1,500 participant judges to construct the EL 2.0 and an additional 5.7 million reviews to validate it. To assess its unique value, the EL 2.0 is compared with two other prominent text analysis tools-LIWC and Warriner et al.'s (Behavior Research Methods, 45, 1191-1207, 2013) wordlist. The EL 2.0 is comparatively distinct in its ability to measure emotionality and explains a significantly greater proportion of the variance in individuals' evaluations. The EL 2.0 can be used with any data that involve speech or writing and provides researchers with the opportunity to capture evaluative reactions both in the laboratory and "in the wild." The EL 2.0 wordlist and normative emotionality, extremity, and valence ratings are freely available from www.evaluativelexicon.com .

Narrative reversals and story success.

Storytelling is a powerful tool that connects us and shapes our understanding of the world. Theories of effective storytelling boast an intellectual history dating back millennia, highlighting the significance of narratives across civilizations. Yet, despite all this theorizing, empirically predicting what makes a story successful has remained elusive. We propose narrative reversals, key turning points in a story, as pivotal facets that predict story success. Drawing on narrative theory, we conceptualize reversals as plot: essential moments that push narratives forward and shape audience reception. Across 30,000 movies, TV shows, novels, and fundraising pitches, we use computational linguistics and trend detection analysis to develop a quantitative method for measuring narrative reversals via shifts in valence. We find that stories with more' and more dramatic, turning points are more successful. Our findings shed light on this age-old art form and provide a practical approach to understanding and predicting the impact of storytelling.

Mass-scale emotionality reveals human behaviour and marketplace success.

Online reviews promise to provide people with immediate access to the wisdom of the crowds. Yet, half of all reviews on Amazon and Yelp provide the most positive rating possible, despite human behaviour being substantially more varied in nature. We term the challenge of discerning success within this sea of positive ratings the 'positivity problem'. Positivity, however, is only one facet of individuals' opinions. We propose that one solution to the positivity problem lies with the emotionality of people's opinions. Using computational linguistics, we predict the box office revenue of nearly 2,400 movies, sales of 1.6 million books, new brand followers across two years of Super Bowl commercials, and real-world reservations at over 1,000 restaurants. Whereas star ratings are an unreliable predictor of success, emotionality from the very same reviews offers a consistent diagnostic signal. More emotional language was associated with more subsequent success.

Attitude Accessibility as a Function of Emotionality.

Despite the centrality of both attitude accessibility and attitude basis to the last 30 years of theoretical and empirical work concerning attitudes, little work has systematically investigated their relation. The research that does exist provides conflicting results and is not at all conclusive given the methodology that has been used. The current research uses recent advances in statistical modeling and attitude measurement to provide the most systematic examination of the relation between attitude accessibility and basis to date. Specifically, we use mixed-effects modeling which accounts for variation across individuals and attitude objects in conjunction with the Evaluative Lexicon (EL)-a linguistic approach that allows for the simultaneous measurement of an attitude's valence, extremity, and emotionality. We demonstrate across four studies, over 10,000 attitudes, and nearly 50 attitude objects that attitudes based on emotion tend to be more accessible in memory, particularly if the attitude is positive.

On the Dominance of Attitude Emotionality.

Many situations in our lives require us to make relatively quick decisions as whether to approach or avoid a person or object, buy or pass on a product, or accept or reject an offer. These decisions are particularly difficult when there are both positive and negative aspects to the object. How do people go about navigating this conflict to come to a summary judgment? Using the Evaluative Lexicon (EL), we demonstrate across three studies, 7,700 attitude expressions, and nearly 50 different attitude objects that when positivity and negativity conflict, the valence that is based more on emotion is more likely to dominate. Furthermore, individuals are also more consistent in the expression of their univalent summary judgments when they involve greater emotionality. In sum, valence that is based on emotion tends to dominate when resolving ambivalence and also helps individuals to remain consistent when offering quick judgments.