An exhaustive overview of psychological research reveals that bad is consistently stronger than good which can have both positive and negative implications for the workplace.
A wide-ranging overview of related psychological studies reveals that, without exception, bad has a greater impact than good, no matter the context. Here is some of the evidence presented by the researchers:
Reacting to Events: Studies demonstrate that a major negative event has a lasting impact on an individual; a major positive event results in immediate joy, which soon dissipates. According to another study: a bad day hurts the following day, while a good day does not have an impact on the following day. In yet another study, participants were more distressed about losing $50 than happy about winning $50.
Close Relationships: According to different studies, negative communication (threats, insults, criticisms) has a greater negative impact on relationships than the positive impact of positive communication (agreement, confirmation, expressing forgiveness). Likewise, the presence or absence of negative behaviors has a greater impact on relationship quality than the presence or absence of positive behaviors.
Emotion: Research consistently reveals the greater strength of negative emotions. Participants in one study were more likely to recall a negative memory than a positive memory, by a margin of four to one. In another study, people were far more likely to try to change a bad mood than to prolong a good one. Linguistic studies note the preponderance of words for negative emotions, another example of the attention paid to negative emotions.
Learning: Various studies have shown that learners learn more quickly when motivated by punishment than reward (e.g., punished for wrong answers vs. rewarded for right answers).
Social Support: In a study of people who recently lost a job, social conflict (negative, undermining interactions) had a greater negative impact than social support (positive, encouraging interactions). Over time, the negative impact increased rather than decreased, while social support had a minimal effect.
Stereotypes: One study compared the number of observations required for confirmation and disconfirmation of a stereotype. The more negative the stereotype, the more quickly participants were willing to confirm it, and the more they resisted changing their minds.
Forming Impressions: Numerous studies demonstrate that an individual’s negative traits carry more weight than positive traits in forming people’s impressions of that individual. One study also showed that a positive impression can easily change to a negative impression, while a negative impression is not so easily reversed.
Self: Self-esteem often depends on avoiding the bad rather than achieving the good. In one study, the correlation between being close to the participants’ undesired selves (“How I hope never to be”) and dissatisfaction with life was twice as strong as the correlation between being close to their ideal selves and satisfaction with life.
Feedback: In one study, the self-esteem of participants told they had been rejected for inclusion in a group decreased; in contrast, being accepted into a group did not increase their self-esteem.
Health: Research has shown that stress and a lack of social support (e.g., feeling lonely) can reduce the strength of your immune system, while stress-reducing techniques and social support have little impact on your immune system.
Business Application
The overwhelming evidence that bad is consistently stronger and more impactful than good may elicit some pessimism: what can business leaders learn from such a disappointing outcome?
The first is that the strength of bad over good reflects a fundamental adaptive trait in humans and animals: in a quest for survival, attending to the bad is more urgent than attending to the good. This can apply to the workplace: kind words and support may elicit satisfaction and gratitude, but bullying, abuse, and sexual harassment must spark a strong reaction on the part of the victim and his or her superiors.
Second, leaders and managers must be aware that nature will push them to focus on the bad and ignore the good not necessarily an effective leadership strategy. For example, managers may assess employees unfairly, overemphasizing the negative. Managers may also micromanage employees because they assume they are unable to succeed on their own. Finally, the evidence from the research shows that the good can overcome the bad through sheer numbers. In other words, leaders must make a special effort to create as many good events as possible to overcome any bad events. Celebrating small wins is one way to multiply good events. The accumulation of small acts of kindness can also have a counterbalancing effect.
The overwhelming evidence that bad is consistently stronger and more impactful than good may elicit some pessimism: what can business leaders learn from such a disappointing outcome?
The first is that the strength of bad over good reflects a fundamental adaptive trait in humans and animals: in a quest for survival, attending to the bad is more urgent than attending to the good. This can apply to the workplace: kind words and support may elicit satisfaction and gratitude, but bullying, abuse, and sexual harassment must spark a strong reaction on the part of the victim and his or her superiors.
Second, leaders and managers must be aware that nature will push them to focus on the bad and ignore the good—not necessarily an effective leadership strategy. For example, managers may assess employees unfairly, over-emphasizing the negative. Managers may also micromanage employees because they assume employees are unable to succeed on their own.
Finally, the evidence from the research shows that the good can overcome the bad through sheer numbers. In other words, leaders must make a special effort to create as many good events as possible to overcome any bad events. Celebrating small wins is one way to multiply good events. The accumulation of small acts of kindness can also have a counter-balancing effect.
Roy F. Baumeister website
Ellen Bratslavsky’s profile at Cuyahoga Community College
https://www.tri-c.edu/programs/liberal-arts-and-sciences/psychology/faculty.html
Catrin Finkenauer’s profile at Utrecht University
https://www.uu.nl/staff/cfinkenauer
Kathleen D. Vohs’ profile at the University of Minnesota Carlson School of Management
https://carlsonschool.umn.edu/faculty/kathleen-vohs
Bad Is Stronger than Good. Roy F. Baumeister, Ellen Bratslavsky, Catrin Finkenauer, and Kathleen D. Vohs. Review of General Psychology (December 2001).
Ideas for Leaders is a free-to-access site. If you enjoy our content and find it valuable, please consider subscribing to our Developing Leaders Quarterly publication, this presents academic, business and consultant perspectives on leadership issues in a beautifully produced, small volume delivered to your desk four times a year.
For the less than the price of a coffee a week you can read over 650 summaries of research that cost universities over $1 billion to produce.
Use our Ideas to:
Speak to us on how else you can leverage this content to benefit your organization. info@ideasforleaders.com
