Event valence and unrealistic optimism: further evidence.

Unrealistic optimism is assessed using either a single question, the rating of own likelihood of experiencing an event compared to that of the average person, or two questions, separate rating of own likelihood and that of the average person. The effect of event valence on unrealistic optimism was studied in a sample of 175 students using the two-question measure. Valence was manipulated to be positive, i.e., outcome was desirable, or negative, i.e., outcome was undesirable, by 'framing' the same event appropriately. Unrealistic optimism was greater for negative than positive valence. The effect was of the same direction and magnitude as that found by Gold and Martyn (2003) using the single-question measure. The relationship between event valence and unrealistic optimism does not depend on whether unrealistic optimism is assessed with one or two questions.

Event valence and unrealistic optimism.

The effect of event valence on unrealistic optimism was studied. 94 Deakin University students rated the comparative likelihood that they would experience either a controllable or an uncontrollable health-related event. Valence was manipulated to be positive (outcome was desirable) or negative (outcome was undesirable) by varying the way a given event was framed. Participants either were told the conditions which promote the event and rated the comparative likelihood they would experience it or were told the conditions which prevent the event and rated the comparative likelihood they would avoid it. For both the controllable and the uncontrollable events, unrealistic optimism was greater for negative than positive valence. It is suggested that a combination of the 'motivational account' of unrealistic optimism and prospect theory provides a good explanation of the results.