Cited by 729Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesOptimism, Hope, and Well-being

How unrealistic optimism is maintained in the face of reality

Open access
Sharot, Tali, Korn, Christoph W, Dolan, Raymond J·2011·Nature Neuroscience

Abstract

Unrealistic optimism is a pervasive human trait that influences domains ranging from personal relationships to politics and finance. How people maintain unrealistic optimism, despite frequently encountering information that challenges those biased beliefs, is unknown. We examined this question and found a marked asymmetry in belief updating. Participants updated their beliefs more in response to information that was better than expected than to information that was worse. This selectivity was mediated by a relative failure to code for errors that should reduce optimism. Distinct regions of the prefrontal cortex tracked estimation errors when those called for positive update, both in individuals who scored high and low on trait optimism. However, highly optimistic individuals exhibited reduced tracking of estimation errors that called for negative update in right inferior prefrontal gyrus. These findings indicate that optimism is tied to a selective update failure and diminished neural coding of undesirable information regarding the future.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nn.2949

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Neuroscientific data show that a positive view of one's own traits tends to correlate with reduced activation of the right inferior prefrontal gyrus when the subject receives negative self-related information.

    “Relatedly, neuroscientific data show that a positive view of one's own traits tends to correlate with a reduced activation of the right inferior prefrontal gyrus, which is the area of the brain processing selfrelated content, when the subject receives negative self-related information(Sharot et al. 2011).”

    From What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias? (2022) · cites this paper as Sharot et al. 2011

    The Results section ('Trait optimism, biased updating, and BOLD signal'; page unavailable) reports that participants high in trait optimism showed weaker right-IFG tracking of undesirable estimation errors. The study concerns information about the likelihood of adverse events in one's future, not negative information about one's traits. It also does not establish that the right IFG is an area for processing self-related content generally. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Optimists about themselves display a diminished sensitivity for negative information that is in tension with self-related trait optimism.

    “That is, optimists about themselves display a diminished sensitivity for negative information that is in tension with self-related trait optimism (ibid).”

    From What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias? (2022) · cites this paper as Sharot et al. 2011

  • Optimistic updating cannot be interpreted purely on the basis of selective attention, cognitive, or mnemonic abilities in processing desirable and undesirable feedback.

    “optimistic updating could not be interpreted purely on the basis of selective attention, cognitive, or mnemonic abilities in processing desirable and undesirable feedback (19, 20, 45)”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [3]Calderon TG Predictive properties of analysts’ forecasts of corporate earnings The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business 1993 29 41 58
  2. [28]Shefrin H Siegel LB Voices of wisdom: understanding the global financial crisis 2010 224 256 Research foundation of CFA institute Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1523931

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sharot, T., Korn, C. W., & Dolan, R. J.
Affiliations
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Sharot, Tali
Venue
Nature Neuroscience
Published
2011-10-09
Volume
14
Issue
11
Pages
1475-1479
ISSN
  • 1097-6256 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1726
OpenAlex
W2039909349
Cited by
729
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 62 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 67 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 19
FWCI
13.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (078865)
  • Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
Keywords
optimism bias, belief updating, Bayesian updating, estimation error, prefrontal cortex, dispositional optimism, negative information processing, cognitive biases
MeSH terms
Adult, Affect, Attitude, Brain, Brain Mapping, Denial, Psychological, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Reality Testing, Statistics as Topic, Observer Variation, Young Adult

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