The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
the more negative stories that we put out the more hits we're going to get the more this media not this media company I'm just I'm not getting but all the other way well that I I would argue some of your success comes from the fact that you don't wallow in the negativity and there's a real thirst and a hunger and desire to learn more about who we are and how we can make ourselves better but that negativity bias is still part of us right
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
negative emotions get your attention and they're supposed to Evolution favors negative emotions positive emotions nice to have negative emotions pay attention because that could cost you your life if you don't
and and again there's an evolutionary basis for negativity bias right you could make the case for how we were far we are far better off evolutionarily to pay attention to negative signals rather than positive signals negative thing is what could kill you that demands your attention the positive thing is great but it doesn't need as much attention in the moment right
Evolution favors negative emotions. Positive emotions nice to have. Negative emotions pay attention because that could cost you your life.