The feature-positive effect in allocations of responsibility for collaborative tasks

People commonly believe they have contributed more to collaborative tasks than others give them credit for. We distinguish between two types of contributions – additions (such as adding words to a co-authored paper) and deletions (such as removing extraneous words) – and show that individuals are especially prone to receive less credit from others than they believe they deserve when their contributions consist of taking something away rather than adding something. Participants who shortened some writing believed they improved it just as much as did participants who lengthened some, but were seen by others as having contributed less. Although one can hardly fail to notice oneʹs own deletions, these contributions – like any contributions that, by their very nature, leave little trace of themselves – are easy for others to overlook.