Cited by 7,678Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsSocial and Intergroup PsychologyPersonality Traits and Psychology

Bad Is Stronger Than Good

Baumeister, Roy F., Bratslavsky, Ellen, Finkenauer, Catrin, Vohs, Kathleen D.·2001·Review of General Psychology

Abstract

The greater power of bad events over good ones is found in everyday events, major life events (e.g., trauma), close relationship outcomes, social network patterns, interpersonal interactions, and learning processes. Bad emotions, bad parents, and bad feedback have more impact than good ones, and bad information is processed more thoroughly than good. The self is more motivated to avoid bad self-definitions than to pursue good ones. Bad impressions and bad stereotypes are quicker to form and more resistant to disconfirmation than good ones. Various explanations such as diagnosticity and salience help explain some findings, but the greater power of bad events is still found when such variables are controlled. Hardly any exceptions (indicating greater power of good) can be found. Taken together, these findings suggest that bad is stronger than good, as a general principle across a broad range of psychological phenomena.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323

Cites

272 of 272 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D.
Affiliations
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Baumeister, Roy F.
  • Bratslavsky, Ellen
  • Vohs, Kathleen D.
Venue
Review of General Psychology
Published
2001-12
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
323-370
ISSN
  • 1089-2680 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1552
OpenAlex
W2158810025
Cited by
7,678
References
257
Citations by year
2026: 527 · 2025: 532 · 2024: 486 · 2023: 458 · 2022: 461 · 2021: 564 · 2020: 516 · 2019: 480 · 2018: 443 · 2017: 415 · 2016: 395 · 2015: 395 · 2014: 366 · 2013: 318 · 2012: 277
FWCI
33.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Review of General Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
negativity bias, emotional valence, negative emotions, self-avoidance, impression formation, stereotype formation, diagnosticity, salience, major life events, trauma, close relationships, social networks, learning process

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review