Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The Barnum effect in a group setting.

C R Snyder1, C L Newburg

  • 1Dept. of Psychology, The University of Kansas, Lawrence 66045, USA.

Journal of Personality Assessment
|January 1, 1981
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Characterization of Interfacial Structure in Polymer-Fullerene Bulk Heterojunctions via ^{13}C {^{2}H} Rotational Echo Double Resonance NMR.

Physical review letters·2018
Same author

Forgiveness as a mediator of the relationship between PTSD and hostility in survivors of childhood abuse.

Cognition & emotion·2012
Same author

The effectiveness of a hope intervention in coping with cold pressor pain.

Journal of health psychology·2008
Same author

Balancing psychological assessments: including strengths and hope in client reports.

Journal of clinical psychology·2005
Same author

[Relationship between hope and subjective well-being: reliability and validity of the dispositional Hope Scale, Japanese version].

Shinrigaku kenkyu : The Japanese journal of psychology·2005
Same author

Hopeful thinking in older adults: back to the future.

Experimental aging research·2005
Same journal

Comparing the Psychometric Characteristics of Two 32-Item Versions of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems: An Extended Replication Study in English and Dutch.

Journal of personality assessment·2026
Same journal

Psychometric Evaluation of a Contextualized Version of the German BFI-2 for the Digital World Across Self- and Other-Ratings.

Journal of personality assessment·2026
Same journal

Case Studies with the Rorschach Test: A Systematic Literature Review.

Journal of personality assessment·2026
Same journal

A Stratified Analysis of Body Perception, Interoception and Somatosensory Brain Processing in Healthy Adults.

Journal of personality assessment·2026
Same journal

Predicting the Level of Suicide Risk with the MMPI-3.

Journal of personality assessment·2026
Same journal

Strengths Knowledge Scale (SKS) and Strengths Use Scale (SUS): Revisiting Psychometric Properties and Gender Invariance in the General Spanish Population.

Journal of personality assessment·2026
See all related articles

In group settings, positive feedback is perceived as more accurate and accepted than negative feedback. Feedback from a group leader also enhances perceived accuracy and acceptance compared to peer feedback.

Area of Science:

  • Social Psychology
  • Group Dynamics
  • Human Behavior

Background:

  • The Barnum effect describes the tendency for individuals to accept vague personality descriptions as uniquely applicable to themselves.
  • Traditional Barnum effect research often focuses on individual reactions to feedback.
  • Group settings introduce complex social dynamics influencing feedback perception.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To extend the Barnum effect paradigm by examining feedback reactions within a group context.
  • To investigate the influence of feedback favorability (positive vs. negative) and source status (leader vs. peer) on perception.
  • To explore the role of answerability (sharing feedback with the source) in moderating these effects.

Main Methods:

  • Participants (8 per group) engaged in a group experience.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Bogus positive or negative feedback was administered, attributed to either the group leader or a peer.
  • An answerability manipulation determined if participants would share their feedback reactions with the source.

    • Main Results:

    • Positive feedback was rated as more accurate and accepted more than negative feedback.
    • Feedback from the group leader led to higher perceived accuracy, acceptance, and recall than peer feedback.
    • No significant differences were found in the recall of positive versus negative feedback.

    Conclusions:

    • Feedback favorability and source status significantly impact how individuals perceive and accept information in group settings.
    • High-status sources, like group leaders, elicit greater trust and acceptance of feedback.
    • Findings have implications for understanding feedback dynamics and interpersonal influence within groups.