The Future is Bright: The Underdog Label, Availability, and Optimism

Abstract

Research suggests that people support underdogs. Three studies examined how laypeople conceptualize the underdog label. Study 1 used a free association method to create a semantic network map of the underdog construct. In Study 2, participants provided their own definitions and selected the entity that best exemplified an underdog. In the two studies, the underdog term was linked to both disadvantage and successful qualities. In Study 3, participants read fictional stories about competing entities unlikely to succeed. When targets were labeled as underdogs, participants predicted that they would perform significantly better than expectations. We suggest that, although dictionaries define underdogs as unlikely to prevail, a layperson's conceptions, shaped by inspirational archetypal stories of odds overcome, are more optimistic.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank Caitlin VanRiper and Sonya James for serving as raters for study 2 of this article.

Notes

¹We ran another sample modifying the “disadvantaged” label to a no-label condition (the weaker entity was described only as behind or trailing). Of those who responded correctly to our manipulation check (assessing the percentages of predicted success reported in the news article), the combined business and sport domains replicated the results (underdog M = 46%, behind/no-label M = 37.74%, N = 73, p = .037). The politics domain did not replicate.