Background: Information asymmetry is a widely studied economic phenomenon. It refers to the situation in which one group in a transaction has more information than the other. Nowadays, information asymmetry has been studied not only as a financial topic but also as a potential reason for essential social problems. Objective: To take Chinese doctor–patient relationship as an example and investigate the relationship among information asymmetry, trust level, and aggression behavior using an experimental design. Methods: A total of 44 undergraduates (information asymmetry group, N = 22, 5 males, 17 females, mean age = 18.95, SD = 0.18; information symmetry group, N = 22, 7 males, 15 females, mean age = 19.27, SD = 0.18) took part in our experiment. Different slides and guidance were used to create a virtual information asymmetry situation, and we use the Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale (WFPTS) and the hot sauce allocation paradigm to measure their trust level and aggression, respectively. Results: Participants in the information asymmetry group allocated significantly more hot sauce to the doctor (p <.005, d = 1.09) and displayed significantly lower trust level (p < 0.05, d = −0.78) than the control group. Patients' trust level had a significant mediating effect (95% confidence interval [−1.39, –0.05]). Conclusion: Asymmetric information may arouse patients' aggression and lower their trust in doctors. Patients' trust level is also a significant partial mediator between their aggression and information asymmetry. The current study reinforces the urgent need for information openness in the Chinese medical system.

Doctor-patient conflict is trending in social attention research. However, the existing literature rarely explores whether a patient's hostile attribution bias (HAB) in the doctor-patient interaction affects the aggression level against doctors. This study aimed to explore the relationship and mechanism between different types of HAB and aggression in patients. In Study 1, 80 patients completed the word sentence association paradigm for hostility (WSAP-Hostility), and their explicit and implicit aggression levels were measured using the hot sauce paradigm and the single-category implicit association test (SC-IAT), respectively. In Study 2, 63 patients were randomly divided into an experimental (rejection) and a control group. Their state hostile attribution bias (SHAB) was activated through social rejection materials. They completed the SHAB questionnaire and anger expression inventory, and their explicit and implicit aggression levels were measured as in Study 1. In both studies, results indicated that patients' trait and state HAB were significantly related to explicit aggression but not implicit aggression. Hostile interpretation positively predicted explicit aggression, whereas benign interpretation had a negative predictive effect on explicit aggression. Patients’ anger played a mediating role between SHAB and explicit aggression. These findings suggest that patients' HAB affects explicit aggression toward doctors and anger plays a mediating role.