Downloaded by guest on September 28, 2021 ro,M 48109; MI Arbor, a Soroka Stuart to reactions psychophysiological bias in negativity a of evidence Cross-national www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1908369116 coverage news journalistic leads.” conventional that it the bleeds, suggest it reconsider “if and to that content, wisdom reason positive be more may high- for there our they potential as however, the Insofar variation, light negative. news individual-level predominantly audience-seeking highlight be for average, results to tendency on world results the biases the our for around negativity as account of Insofar help pervasiveness they content. the news varia- clear to individual-level make but responsiveness considerable date, highlight in to to tion serve comprehensive biases also most negativity they the of offer demonstration Results cross-national content. to news reactions video 6-continent psychophysiological This 17-country, real world. examining a political study from stim- our results experimental and to reports related samples accordingly tangentially Anglo-American work only small are in that on uli biases” based existing but “Negativity is documented, well research information. are behavior positive and cognition strongly human than more react to negative humans for to 2019) tendency One 14, the content? May in news review lie negative for may of (received answer prevalence 2019 the 5, August for approved accounts and What NJ, Princeton, University, Princeton Fiske, T. Susan by Edited and Israel Israel; 9190501, 9190501, Jerusalem Jerusalem, of University ihncutyvraini epne onw otn.Ti fact This considerable content. is news there to Indeed, responses in positive easily country. variation not versus or within-country are negative culture differences by to individual-level a explained react in These individuals average, differences content. which considerable on news news in also is, video way however, there the to are, reactions that There psychophysiological suggest content. in continents, bias 6 negativity and tries to responses psychophysiological in news. biases video negativity body comparable on directly data largest, single of what the from knowledge, results our present across to then content is, We news argue, cultures. to and we responses individuals in key, both differences The for testing to factors. in also these -system lies but which individual-level, or to to political, just extent cultural, not the in due gap distinguish vary this to biases of negativity inability consequence major an one is that research research note news comparative We to issue. of the relates paucity on it the as highlighting particularly consumption, biases, negativity on obvious literature of is subject this world negativity, the with significance. around news wrought which especially during is period current- a mass-mediated In of our content. impact to affairs and central is flow considering content the and news of of understanding affairs. biases nature the negativity current for of about implications their prevalence attitudes the citizens’ for news as Testing also well thus cov- and relatively as news selection, is production, news news of affect for nature biases biases Negativity the negativity clear. for of tendency importance this The erage. of relevance the and T eateto omncto n ei,Uiest fMcia,AnAbr I48109; MI Arbor, Ann Michigan, of University Media, and Communication of Department eut,bsdo vr100rsodnsars 7coun- 17 across respondents 1,000 over on based Results, existing the review first We follows. as proceeds paper The i ae sfcsdo h ua rpniyt iemore information give positive to to than propensity information human negative the to on weight focused is paper his | eaiiybias negativity c a,b,1,2 D preetd cec oiiu,Universit Politique, Science de epartement ´ arc Fournier Patrick , | oiia communication political c,1 n iahNir Lilach and , e eateto omncto n oraim erwUiest fJrslm Jerusalem Jerusalem, of University Hebrew , and Communication of Department eMontr de e ´ d,e a,Montr eal, ´ aadpsto:Tedt n nRsrp htrpiae l nlsshv been have analyses all replicates that script (https://dataverse. R page data author’s an lead harvard.edu/dataverse/ssoroka the under and Dataverse, Harvard data the at deposited The deposition: Data 1073/pnas.1908369116/-/DCSupplemental. y at online information supporting contains article This 2 1 BY-NC-ND) (CC 4.0 NoDerivatives License distributed under is article access open This Submission.y Direct PNAS a is article This interest.y of conflict paper.y no the declare wrote P.F. authors and performed The S.S. L.N. and and P.F., data; S.S., analyzed P.F. research; and S.S. designed research; L.N. and P.F., S.S., contributions: Author tv es ic aktfre ilpouenw nln with line in neg- news for produce demand will the forces of market function since democ- a negative news, representative partly toward ative of skewed is systematically quality This is and information. content nature that and the racy, to recent central in is increasing been also been in has has it coverage media media years, news of decades. as mass many studies even for in that, on negative evident suggests work Impor- work is (3–5). the this it cross-nationally tantly, of been and decisions ’ 2), body has and (1, content coverage the considerable States with in United a the synonymous asymmetry of nearly This of is focus news. feature democratic contrast, defining of for in a absence mechanism news, is vital good tone a news; negative are Second, and accountability. citizens representative between and large-scale information features of elites of flow critical recognized component a is provide widely critical Media news democracy. and 2 mass-mediated central First, by a communications. motivated modern-day systematically is of not research is Our it if Background even citizens attention- be some negative. could content for news grabbing that possibility the highlights ..adPF otiue qal oti work.y this to equally contributed P.F. and S.S. owo orsodnemyb drse.Eal [email protected] Email: addressed. be may correspondence whom To uinefrpstv escontent. the news underestimate positive not for audience should media producers diversified news a great environment, in real a Especially of is newsmakers: is finding for there latter significance so, The individuals. Even across stories. variation of news neg- deal positive by by world, activated than physiologically the more this ative around atten- is is all more human widespread that, average be how the suggest to Just evidence tendency content. Our human news tendency? a in negative negativity of to that product tive likely a more is is It news news negative world. for the account around easily content cannot this journalis- on but focus practices, to negative. tic tend predominantly tendency this is of affairs accounts American current of coverage News Significance nsm h aueadqaiyo asmdae escontent news mass-mediated of quality and nature the sum, In a,Q 3 J,Canada; 3J7, H3C QC eal, ´ b eateto oiia cec,Uiest fMcia,Ann Michigan, of University Science, Political of Department ). y d eateto oiia cec,Hebrew Science, Political of Department . y raieCmosAttribution-NonCommercial- Commons Creative www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10. NSLts Articles Latest PNAS | f5 of 1

SOCIAL SCIENCES consumers’ interests, including negativity (6). Even so, the tone that variation in negativity biases is not a primarily cross-cultural of news content has been cited as a of systematic deficien- phenomenon, but an individual one. There already is work sug- cies in what citizens know about their governments and the world gesting that negativity biases in reactions to video news vary around them (1). Inadequate or incorrect political knowledge, across gender, for instance (33). And there is a growing litera- citizen apathy, and disengagement—these are just some of the ture focused on differences in negativity biases across political consequences attributed to the overwhelmingly negative nature ideologies (34–36). of news content. Individual-level variables may be at the root of cross-cultural These facts point to the importance of understanding why variation, insofar as individual-level factors vary across cultures. media content is the way it is. They also highlight the need Individual-level variation may also be entirely independent of to understand if and why media consumers prioritize negative culture or work differently across cultures. Thus far, we simply do coverage. Concerns about media coverage typically focus on not know the extent to which heightened activation in response the supply side of the media—i.e., choices of journalists and to negative news content is a culturally determined phenomenon. editors—but the demand side may be equally important. Even This not only limits our understanding of negativity biases gen- as people say they want more positive news, they systematically erally, it limits our understanding of the demand and supply of select more negative news (7), for instance. This should come as negative news content. no surprise: There are, after all, burgeoning literatures across the social sciences identifying negative biases in human information Cross-National Physiological Responses to News processing and behavior (8–12). Our cross-national work responds to growing pleas for a What explains the apparently widespread preference for neg- more comparative approach to (political) psychology (37) and ative information? One account is rooted in evolutionary theory. more comparative work in political communication as well Attention to negativity may have been advantageous for survival. (38). We also build upon a small, but growing, literature Negative information alerts to potential dangers (13); it has spe- focused on cross-national experimentation in psychology and cial value in terms of “diagnosticity” (14), or the “vigilance” (15) economics (39, 40). that is required to avoid negative outcomes. This account of the Our analyses are based on laboratory experiments run in negativity bias is evident in literatures in physiology (16), neu- 17 countries: Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Denmark, France, rology (17, 18), and, particularly, work on the importance of Ghana, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Russia, Senegal, “orienting responses” in evolutionary biology (19). This account Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We also leads to the expectation of a negativity bias present across all have 2 separate samples in Canada, Anglophone and Franco- human populations. phone, and 2 separate samples in Israel, Jewish and Palestinian. Another account is evident in work on cultural psychology and Our results are based on 1,156 respondents; to our knowledge, anthropology, as well as recent work on “media systems.” This this is the largest and most broadly comparative psychophysi- research emphasizes the possibility that there are cross-cultural ological study in the social sciences to date. (SI Appendix dis- differences in negativity biases. There is, after all, work examin- cusses sampling decisions in detail; SI Appendix, Fig. S1 shows ing cross-cultural variation in related psychological phenomena, the distribution of respondents by country and gender, and SI including self-assessments (20, 21), self-esteem (22), satisfaction Appendix, Fig. S2 shows the distribution of age by country.) (23), optimism (24), and reasoning (25). One frequent contrast The study protocol is straightforward: Respondents watched 7 in this work is between what seem to be more optimistic coun- randomly ordered BBC stories on a laptop com- tries in the West (typically the United States) and less optimistic puter while wearing noise-cancelling headphones and sensors countries in the East (typically Japan). And, while cross-cultural on their fingers to capture skin conductance and blood volume explorations into negativity biases specifically are rare, several pulse. (Videos were subtitled where necessary, and tests sug- important exceptions find evidence of cross-national differences gested that subtitles do not change the results presented here. (23, 26, 27). See SI Appendix, Table A5.) Systematic cross-national differences in responsiveness to There already is a considerable body of work examining neg- news content might provide clues about how this negativity bias ativity biases in psychophysiology; there is a growing literature arises. What might drive this cross-cultural variance? The litera- on psychophysiological reactions to political news content as ture on cultural values points to some possibilities (28). Societies well (33, 41, 42). Physiological measures have the advantage of deal with anxiety about future uncertainties in different ways, capturing real-time, often subconscious, reactions to news con- and the extent to which members of a culture feel threatened tent. We examined normalized skin-conductance levels (nSCLs), by ambiguous or unknown situations may well affect the ten- indicating physiological activation connected to, e.g., “orienting dency to focus on negative information. A range of institutional responses,” and the “fight or flight” response. We also relied factors may also matter. Societal tension between groups, and on heart-rate variability (HRV)—specifically, the root mean especially conflict that has crystallized in the polarization of square of the successive differences (RMSSD), capturing a com- political-party systems, may matter for negativity, at least where bination of activation (increasing heart rate) and attentiveness attentiveness to news coverage is concerned. Another dimension (decreasing heart rate). (For more thorough accounts of both of variability is rooted in the institutionally coded professional measures, see, e.g., refs. 43 and 44.) Note that past work also practices of journalists (29). A strong professional require- views HRV as a measure of “emotional regulation” (45). The ment that journalists routinely cover politics in conflictual terms 2 perspectives are similar—each focuses on variation caused may also lead to viewers’ habitual expectation and attention to by the excitatory sympathetic nervous system and inhibitory negativity. parasympathetic nervous system, and each views higher Note that neither the evolutionary nor the cultural- HRV as an indicator of both activating and calming/focusing institutional account depends on a conscious desire for negative responses. information so much as an unconscious adaptation or learned The tone of video content was the primary independent vari- tendency to prioritize negative information. Note also that the able. Negativity was measured as an interval-level measure based 2 accounts are not in competition—negativity biases are almost on the average of second-by-second coding by expert coders certainly conditioned by both. Consider work on the importance (outlined in more detail in SI Appendix). Expert coders’ assess- of “social learning,” alongside biology, as the basis of culture (30) ments were in line with assessments from study participants. and work in neurology and physiology on culture–gene coevo- (Average story ratings, by country, are shown in SI Appendix, lution (31, 32). We also do not want to discount the possibility Fig. S3.)

2 of 5 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1908369116 Soroka et al. Downloaded by guest on September 28, 2021 Downloaded by guest on September 28, 2021 ooae al. et Soroka combined. 1. Fig. on focused exclusively sample, based large not a and such content, on news rely video to actual first on the among positive are for than coverage news negative in coverage. SD The news for physiological observed story. greater that the news is expectation of the 65% a arousal supports to into equivalent evidence s is The 2 20 nSCL. Fig. content, in (−2) shown positive shift and neu- versus (0) content, (+2) tral 2 negative Fig. of skin (42). impact on story estimated news the negativity a story), shows of of course by impact the the over seconds, decreases that (in conductance suggesting time work with past negativity given interacted nSCL of in S3 included are Table models these S2 RMSSD; Table Appendix, for respondent-stimulus- SI used same was the as using data those level to similar are results in shown models second these interpret these we during stories. Given (44), arousal negative and stories. content attentiveness higher media news reflecting and as negative positive results HRV during during on did rate work they past heart than Participants in stories RMSSD. variability in news higher SD observed exhibited the thus of 10% of to 1, tone equivalent Fig. equally; story in shown average weighted shift an are The from different.) samples substantively not country-level are all results that so viduals the on S3 based Table are Results in 1. shown Fig. model in regression illustrated are countries, all cap- in was measures nSCL physiological and of in “panel” processing discussed The a is intervals. was dataset 1-s panel at peri- respondent time-series tured time each a short using which very nSCL in examined over we measured stories. here, level. be ods; news respondent–story can the entire at conductance of longer thus Skin is course over values the RMSSD measured of over Analysis necessarily case, was this rate intervals—in heart in Variation

RMSSD they work, past with line in are findings these while that Note second-by- on based 2, Fig. in illustrated are nSCL for Results participants all across estimated RMSSD, for results basic The aggregation. of levels different several at data use Analyses 114 116 118 120 122 124 h siae feto essoytn nRSD l countries all RMSSD, on tone story news of effect estimated The erdcstesm oe,asgigwihst indi- to weights assigning model, same the reproduces wt onr egt) h eodb-eodmodels second-by-second The weights). country (with IAppendix. SI oiieNurlNegative Neutral Positive wtotcutywihs and weights) country (without oeta these that Note S4. Table Appendix, SI IAppendix, (SI S2. Table Appendix, SI pstv)t 2(eaie,is (negative), +2 to (positive) −2 Video Tone IAppendix, SI .AOA ugs htcuty(nldda atrvariable, factor a as (included country that suggest ANOVAs 4. overall an same: individual-level the of degree is good difference; a story with data but basic bias, of the negativity average levels cases, and all vary specifications in results aggregation, model country-by-country different while across signif- that slightly not note although (And negativity expectations, so. our of In icantly to impact countries. opposite the 17 average, Sweden, the on and of is, Zealand 9 New in countries, biases 1-tailed 2 negativity a significant on sig- to (based is point zero coefficient mean than are the asterisks greater which in and nificantly for country, countries as by the shown beside specification are shown results same Again, S4. the Table nSCL, on using negativity each for in participant, separately increase estimated models 1-unit second-by-second on a based of effect estimated the during RMSSD content. higher video systematically negative showed than Sweden 1-tailed greater and a significantly Italy, is on coefficient (based within-country mean zero coun- of the the deal beside which asterisks great for shows a tries 3 Fig. is Indeed, there well. as But variability coefficient zero. mean than the greater Overall, is stories. news and negative the to by of attentive right activated more the are to respondents participants that more line—suggesting are zero there in balance, result overall On the 1. underlying makes Fig. variability figure of The degree measure. high the negativity clear the for effects” coefficients “estimated where the country, are by shown, is effects spec- models estimated same on in the based using as negativity, participant, ification in every for increase separately 1-unit effect estimated a 4 estimated the of and shows RMSSD 3 3 Fig. on test. Figs. diagnostic variation. critical the cross-national offer systematic of possibility world. the around the content for news accounting news negative to of negative closer frequency step by high one activated perhaps, that more are, demonstrates We are real coverage. directly world of the study is around This validity humans clear: external be high To with cross- significance. stimuli in evident using readily in data is bias national news negativity video to a responses that physiological fact The respondents. Anglo-American combined. countries all stories, news 2. Fig.

onr consfrvr iteo h aito nFg.3and 3 Figs. in variation the of little very for accounts Country plots which 4, Fig. in nSCL, for similar relatively is story The the examine to is goal principal our that however, Recall, Change in nSCL (*100) −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0.0 0.2 h siae feto yscn essoytn nnC,2 into s 20 nSCL, on tone story news by-second of effect estimated The IAppendix.) SI h itiuino these of distribution The S2. Table Appendix, SI oiieNurlNegative Neutral Positive t et;ol rzl aaa France, Canada, Brazil, only test); Video Tone NSLts Articles Latest PNAS t et.Results test). IAppendix, SI | f5 of 3

SOCIAL SCIENCES cal and neurological) negativity biases in information processing. Brazil* That said, our results find little impact of country-level context in conditioning physiological responsiveness to video news. Canada* There are, of course, a number of limitations to this study. Chile We opted for nearly identical stimuli across countries, which China has the advantage of comparability, but also means that we Denmark capture responses to news that may be different from what is typical in each country. A survey question asking about differ- France* ences between our BBC and domestic news stories suggests small Ghana to moderate observed differences for all (non-U.K.) countries India in our study (SI Appendix, Fig. S4). Even so, understanding the Israel demand and supply of news may benefit from further country- specific analysis, targeting not just the tone, but also other Italy* varying aspects of news coverage. Japan We also do not want to discount entirely the possibility that New Zealand context matters for negativity biases. The diagnosticity, or “outly- ingness” (47), of negative content may well vary across contexts; Russia those contexts may simply not correspond to the national– Senegal cultural samples we examine here. Indeed, even one’s own Sweden* personal information environment, structured by factors such as UK income and employment, may affect negativity biases and news consumption. All we can say definitively here is that there is no US link in our data between physiological reactions to valenced news −40 −20 0 20 40 content and national contexts—political, media, or otherwise. The Impact of Negative News on RMSSD That said, our results demonstrate a broadly cross-national (Distributions of Individual−Level Coefficients, by Country) negativity bias in responsiveness to video news content, while Fig. 3. The estimated effect of news story tone on RMSSD, by country. at the time demonstrating a very high degree of individual-level Asterisks indicate the countries for which the mean coefficient is signifi- variation. This individual-level variation has important implica- cantly greater than zero (based on a 1-tailed t test). tions for how we understand news production. Most importantly, it suggests that audience-seeking need not neces- sarily be drawn to predominantly negative content. Even as the with no additional controls) accounts for 1.5% of the observed average tendency may be for viewers to be more attentive to and variance in coefficients for RMSSD and 2.7% of the observed aroused by negative content, there would appear to be a good variance in coefficients for nSCL. Even if there were cultural, number of individuals with rather different or perhaps more political, and/or media-system variables correlated with cross- mutable preferences. One lesson of our analyses is that work national differences, then, it seems unlikely that they would on media coverage and news production should not lose sight explain much variance, and, indeed, we find no significant cor- of these individual-level differences. For those focused on the relations between such measures and the coefficients used in Figs. 3 and 4 (SI Appendix, Table A6). This is not to say that there are no systematic individual-level differences—there clearly are significant differences in the ways in which individuals react to Brazil* negative versus positive news content. Those differences sim- Canada* ply do not appear to be strongly connected to country-level contextual factors. Chile* China Discussion Denmark* Our results suggest that negativity biases in reactions to news France content are not a uniquely American phenomenon. Reactions to video news content reveal a mean tendency for humans to Ghana* be more aroused by and attentive to negative news. That said, India there also is considerable individual-level variation around that Israel* mean, and, in some instances, country-level samples would not Italy on their own suggest statistically significant negativity biases in responsiveness to video news content. Japan Note that our results are focused entirely on reactions to news New Zealand content—they do not run contrary to evidence of other system- Russia* atic and important cross-cultural differences in psychology and information processing, nor do they counter the claim that deep- Senegal* seated negativity biases in information processing are endemic. Sweden There is, of course, a good deal of work in psychology and neu- UK rology highlighting negativity biases in information processing US* generally (13, 16–22, 46). Our goal has been to examine the degree to which these widely accepted psychological and neuro- −0.02 −0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 logical findings are evidenced in reactions to video news content. The Impact of Negative News on nSCL This is because we are interested in understanding why news (Distributions of Individual−Level Coefficients, by Country) content looks the way it does, and we allow for the possibility Fig. 4. The estimated effect of by-second news story tone on nSCL, 20 s into that reactions to news content are conditioned by a range of news stories, by country. Asterisks indicate the countries for which the mean contextual and cultural factors beyond fundamental (physiologi- coefficient is significantly greater than zero (based on a 1-tailed t test).

4 of 5 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1908369116 Soroka et al. Downloaded by guest on September 28, 2021 Downloaded by guest on September 28, 2021 4 .J kwosi .E altn eaiiyadeteiybae nimpression in biases extremity and Negativity to Carlston, evolution E. cultural D. and Skowronski, biological J. Using J. news: 14. and for negative risk. Hardwired of under impact Shoemaker, The decision J. perception: P. person of 13. in weight analysis and An Attention Fiske, theory: contagion. T. S. Prospect and 12. Tversky, dominance, A. negativity Kahneman, bias, D. Negativity 11. Royzman, B. E. Rozin, P. 10. 1 .J en,Pstv efves nesadn nvrasadvraiiyacross variability and universals Understanding self-views: Positive Heine, J. S. for 21. bias pessimistic and optimistic on variations Cultural Asakawa, K. error Chang, for C. system E. neural 20. a of Localization Tucker, A. M. D. 19. Posner, attention, your I. M. have I Dehaene, May S. Chartrand, 18. L. T. Larsen, T. J. Cacioppo, T. J. mobilization- Smith, The K. events: N. negative complexity. and 17. positive cognitive of and effects value Asymmetrical Taylor, stimulus E. S. Affective Bieri, 16. J. Tripodi, T. Irwin, M. 15. 3 .Osi .Dee,D .Co,C i-reo .Co,“h yaiso al vnsand events daily of dynamics “The Choi, I. Kim-Prieto, C. Choi, W. D. Diener, E. Oishi, S. function- 23. self-esteem in similarities Cultural Deng, C. Oakes, A. M. Cai, H. Brown, D. J. 22. o eak,sm fwihwr udmna otesuy nparticular, in study; the to fundamental were which of some remarks, for and data ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. (48). research, Dataverse and Harvard the education through of available are purposes materials the replication For strategies. mation ooae al. et Soroka a ogtfo n rvddb l atcpns sn eticue in data. included physiological text country. using each participants, in location all C. by section provided Appendix, was SI and Universit from study the sought This at was experiment. Sciences the Comit des the to et by participants approved and introduce reviewed to used in protocol. script included experimental sections the describes 6 are There systematically less Methods and Materials is that coverage audience- the news for of negative. possibility success the highlights seeking biases variability negativity individual-level content, in news of nature and substance .J .Ccop,W .Grnr Emotion. Gardner, good. L. than W. stronger Cacioppo, is T. Bad J. Vohs, D. 9. K. Finkenauer, C. Bratslavsky, frames. E. news Baumeister, F. negative R. and cynical 8. for demand Consumer Soroka, news. S. campaign Trussler, in M. tone 7. story and ownership Media Dunaway, J. 6. cov- news political in transcultural “Changes Boumans, A W. write: J. Boomgaarden, they G. while H. Vliegenthart, think R. journalists 5. How Newhagen, E. concepts, J. of Zhong, review A B. news: political 4. in Negativity Berganza, R. Esser, F. Lengauer, G. 3. Lichter, R. S. Farnsworth, J. S. 2. Patterson, E. T. 1. e.Gn Psychol. Gen. Rev. Press/Politics J. (2013). 24–53 pp. 2011), U.K., London, UK, Macmillan ” (Palgrave Eds. Dutch 92–110. Voltmer, and K. Brants, British K. Politics, in negativity and in conflict Personalization, erage: making. decision news of model findings. key and operationalizations 2007). 1988-2004 Elections, Presidential U.S. omto:Arve fexplanations. of review A formation: function. surveillance the explain behavior. extreme Econometrica Rev. Psychol. Soc. Personal. cultures. self- for and specified? west is the group (2003). in referent 569–581 the self-enhancement when for east evidence the in there criticism Is sibling: a versus self grass. compensation. and detection stimuli. negative (2003). and 171–183 positive 41, to responses Electrocortical please: hypothesis. minimization Psychol. Soc. Personal. d Sca niaosRsac eis pigr odeh,Ntelns 09,vl 38, vol. 2009), 143–168. Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp. Springer, in Series, Research more” Indicators is (Social Ed. less meet. When do cultures: across twain well-being the sometimes but west, is west and Psychol. east is East ing: oiia omncto nPsmdr eorc:CalnigtePiayof Primacy the Challenging Democracy: Postmodern in Communication Political ha,A lk,F see,Eoindie teto:Dtcigtesaei the in snake the Detecting attention: drives Emotion Esteves, F. Flykt, A. Ohman, ¨ .Ep sco.Gen. Psychol. Exp. J. 4–5 (2009). 140–157 40, .Cl.Eo.Psychol. Evol. Cult. J. 6–9 (1979). 263–292 47, 6–7 (2014). 360–379 19, u fOrder of Out 2–7 (2001). 323–370 5, .Proa.Sc Psychol. Soc. Personal. J. eto F section Appendix, SI 4–4 (1967). 444–448 5, eto D section Appendix, SI etakcneec atcpnsadcolleagues and participants conference thank We sco.Bull. Psychol. eto E section Appendix, SI 6–7 (2001). 466–478 130, 9–2 (2001). 296–320 5, VnaeBos e ok Y 1994). NY, York, New Books, (Vintage sco.Sci. Psychol. h ihl esNgtae eeiinsCvrg of Coverage Television’s Nightmare: News Nightly The 0–2 (2004). 109–122 2, .Commun. J. .Commun. J. eMontr de e ´ sco.Bull. Psychol. Rwa iteedPbihr,Lna,MD, Lanham, Publishers, Littlefield & (Rowman Journalism IAppendix SI 78 (1991). 67–85 110, nu e.Psychol. Rev. Annu. d’ e ´ eto B section Appendix, SI 0–0 (1994). 303–305 5, 8–0 (1980). 889–906 38, 8–0 (2009). 587–608 59, tiu el ehrh e Arts des Recherche la de Ethique ´ 24 (1996). 32–47 46, reyrvesatraieesti- alternative reviews briefly a.Witnifre consent informed Written eal. ´ 7–0 (2012). 179–202 13, .Diener, E. Well-Being, and Culture 3–4 (1989). 131–142 105, icse ohsmln and sampling both discusses ecie h rcsigof processing the describes . eto A section Appendix, SI .Proa.Sc Psychol. Soc. Personal. J. 9–1 (1999). 191–214 50, Neuropsychologia m o.Res. Pol. Am. nldsthe includes .CosCult. Cross J. Int. 41, 84, J. 8 .Srk,P orir .Nr elcto aafr rs-ainlEiec of Evidence Cross-National for: Data Replication Nir, L. Fournier, P. Soroka, S. news. outlying 48. to arousing attentiveness of negatively model A to Soroka, S. access Lamberson, J. Cognitive P. Bolls, 47. D. P. Zhou, S. Lang, A. Grabe, E. M. 46. Herskovits, J. M. Campbell, T. D. Segall, H. research. M. media comparative 39. cross-national of challenges the On Livingstone, world? S. the in people 38. weirdest The Norenzayan, A. Heine, J. S. Henrich, J. 37. Dodd D. M. 36. Feldman, W. M. Cavalli-Sforza, culture? L. constrain L. biology Does 31. Rogers, R. A. 30. theory. universal a Toward culture: journalism Deconstructing Hanitzsch, T. 29. Gabrielidis, C. Hofstede, G. Stefanyenko, T. 28. Stephan, G. W. emotion. Stephan, W. and C. attention, Abalakina-Paap, Culture, M. Hong, Y. 27. Y. Ellsworth, C. P. Grossmann, I. west 26. the Does optimism: unrealistic Nisbett, in R. variation Cultural 25. Lehman, R. D. Heine, J. S. 24. 5 .M pehn,L .Lekn er aevraiiya nidxo regulated of index an as variability rate Heart Luecken, J. L. Appelhans, M. B. 45. Eds., Bolls, Berntson, P. Potter, F. G. R. G. 44. Tassinary, L. Cacioppo, negativity. J. and politics, 43. News, McAdams, S. of Soroka, well-being S. subjective 42. the predicting Factors Soroka, N. Diener, S. C. 41. Diener, M. Diener, E. 40. and sensitivity Disgust Hibbing, R. J. Alford, R. J. Hibbing, V. M. Oxley, D. Smith, B. K. 35. to differently respond men Oxley and R. D. women Do 34. Nir, L. Fournier, P. individualism–collectivism Gidengil, of E. Soroka, coevolution S. Culture–gene 33. Blizinsky, D. K. Chiao, Y. J. 32. n udn rmteCne o h td fDmcai iiesi and Canada. the of Citizenship by Council supported Democratic Humanities was of and work This Science Study Center. Social the Halbert University for Hebrew Center the from the space from laboratory McAdams purpose-built on funding Stephen depended using with and work preliminary work by and for Gidengil; Elin run designed Elisabeth first and were Smith, Mazzoleni, Bennett Experiments by Vowles. Gianpietro software Jack Martinsson, Mathieu and Tsfati, Yariv Tal-Or, Turgeon, Ben-Nun Nurit Johan Splendore, Pazit Sergio Masaru Sauger, Markwat, Nicholas Jiao, Barnhardt, Naurin, Peiran spe- Gelman, Sharon Neils owe Vladimir Duch, Petersen, Payter, and Kohno, Ray Bang abroad Dial, Binetou Heidi have experiments Michael Fatou We Bloom, facilitate to Parado, Szczepanski, Zhirkov. help thanks Kirill Autumn to Andres and cial Rosic, Yair, colleagues Omer Pan, on Tea Valentino, relied Pamnani, Raposo, Shang Dominic Eleonora Torres Vijeta Sow, Amanda Lovbjerg, Panin, Alassane Felipe Ogawa, Sofie Gileadi, Perversi, Hiroki Amma Liu, Martina Nevitte, Nicole Pan, Ling Alex Vidigal, Shang Mitra, Fly, Ken, Gonoi Lee Radhika Jensenius, Marie Robert Marchetti, John Khaghani, Heffernan, Donovan, Emma Saga Dazzan, Heilke, Thomas Veronica Matthias Chen, Hampton, Diop, Danlin Abu-Fani, coordinators Saja d’Angelo, research institutions: Lou Fatou Danin Peter Clatworthy, other Blanchet, thank Yolanda Alexandre and Hibbing, Barbosa, Chen, We own Thiago Adrian, John our Jeremy Rubenson. Alyukov, at Dunaway, Maxim assistants Daniel Johanna research and and Dawes, Loewen, Chris John Arceneaux, Vin eaiiyBa nPyhpyilgclRatost es avr Dataverse. Harvard News. to Reactions 2019. Psychophysiological August 15 in Deposited https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/F08NDH. Bias Negativity a (2018). 942–964 gap. knowledge the of (2000). investigation experimental an news Commun. J. Sci. Sci. preferences. Biol. to B cognition Lond. and Soc. physiology Connecting bad: the fronts Theor. Nations Across Organizations States. United the and Russia about Psychol. information cultural for Memory Gen. Psychol. . . ferently. east? the than vulnerable more feel mtoa responding. emotional Media of Processing Emotional 2017). 4, ed. NY, York, New Press, University (Cambridge (2015). 2014). NY, York, New Press, University nations. Perception orientations. political left-right of neurophysiology the (2008). 1670 news? negative gene. transporter serotonin the and 1981). NJ, Princeton, Press, (MPB-16) Approach. tative 18 (2010). 61–83 33, 6–8 (2007). 367–385 17, 24 (2001). 32–42 32, .Proa.Sc Psychol. Soc. Personal. J. n Why and BbsMril xod .. 1966). U.K., Oxford, (Bobbs-Merrill, oiia tiue aywt hsooia traits. physiological with vary attitudes Political al., et h egah fTogt o sasadWsenr hn Dif- Think Westerners and Asians How Thought: of Geography The 7–0 (2003). 477–500 18, h oiia etrlswt h odadtepltclrgtcon- right political the and good the with rolls left political The al., et eaiiyi eortcPltc:Cue n Consequences and Causes Politics: Democratic in Negativity utr’ osqecs oprn aus eair,Isiuin and Institutions Behaviors, Values, Comparing Consequences: Culture’s 13 (2012). 31–36 141, oiisGend. Politics scohsooia esrmn n enn:Cgiieand Cognitive Meaning: and Measurement Psychophysiological SmnadShse,NwYr,N,2004). NY, York, New Schuster, and (Simon 4–4 (2012). 640–649 367, e.Gn Psychol. Gen. Rev. oorpsi ouainBooy(rneo University (Princeton Biology Population in Monographs , SG ulctos huadOk,C,2001). CA, Oaks, Thousand Publications, (SAGE 4–6 (2016). 344–368 12, Rulde e ok Y d ,2011). 1, ed. NY, York, New (Routledge, 5–6 (1995). 851–864 69, .Proa.Sc Psychol. Soc. Personal. J. utrlTasiso n vlto:AQuanti- A Evolution: and Transmission Cultural rc .Sc il Sci. Biol. Soc. R. Proc. 2–4 (2006). 229–240 10, m Anthropol. Am. h nuneo utr nVisual on Culture of Influence The adoko Psychophysiology of Handbook NSLts Articles Latest PNAS LSOne PLoS oiia Commun. Political 2–3 (2010). 529–537 277, omn Res. Commun. 9–0 (1995). 595–607 68, 1–3 (1988). 819–831 90, 252(2011). e25552 6, Science hls rn.R. Trans. Philos. .Commun. J. .CosCult. Cross J. ea.Brain Behav. (Cambridge 1667– 321, Commun. | 1–22 32, 3–26 27, .Exp. J. f5 of 5 Eur. 68,

SOCIAL SCIENCES