Top

Gepubliceerd in:

06-05-2023 | Research

Does social rigidity predict cognitive rigidity? Profiles of socio-cognitive polarization

Auteurs: Carola Salvi, Paola Iannello, Alice Cancer, Samuel E. Cooper, Mason McClay, Joseph E. Dunsmoor, Alessandro Antonietti

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 8/2023

Abstract

Recent research has proposed a relationship between rigid political ideologies and underlying ‘cognitive styles’. However, there remain discrepancies in how both social and cognitive rigidity are defined and measured. Problem-solving, or the ability to generate novel ideas by exploring unusual reasoning paths and challenging rigid perspectives around us, is often used to operationalize cognitive flexibility. Thus, we hypothesized a relation between forms of social rigidity, including Socio-cognitive polarization (i.e., a factor capturing conservative political ideology, absolutism/intolerance of ambiguity, and xenophobia), bullshit receptivity (i.e., overestimating pseudo-profound statements), overclaiming (tendency to self-enhance), and cognitive rigidity (i.e., problem-solving). Our results showed differences in performance on problem-solving tasks between four latent profiles of social rigidity identified in our sample. Specifically, those low in socio-cognitive polarization, bullshit, and overclaiming (i.e., less rigid) performed the best on problem-solving. Thus, we conclude that social and cognitive rigidity may share an underlying socio-cognitive construct, wherein those who are more socially rigid are also more likely to be also cognitively rigid when processing non-social information.

vorige artikel Parafoveal syntactic processing from word N + 2 during reading: the case of gender-specific German articles

volgende artikel Collaborative inhibition effect: the role of memory task and retrieval method

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

As reviewed by Ionescu (2012), there are several behavioral tasks that are classically used to operationalize cognitive flexibility in adults, including the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (Grant & Berg, 1948), task switching and optional shift paradigms (Miyake & Friedman, 2012), the Alternative Uses Task (AUT; Guilford, et al. 1978), insight problems (Salvi, Costantini, Pace & Palmiero, 2018), and induction tasks (Shafto, Coley, & Vitkin, 2007).

Ontological confusion occurs when the elements that make up the natural world and the basic rules that govern them become confused and misrepresented. Ontological confusion has been found to be a strong predictor of non-evidence based beliefs (Lobato et al. 2014).

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.

Akogul, S., & Erisoglu, M. (2017). An approach for determining the number of clusters in model-based cluster analysis. Entropy, 19(9), 452. https://doi.org/10.3390/e19090452CrossRef

Azen, R., & Budescu, D. V. (2003). The dominance analysis approach for comparing predictors in multiple regression. Psychological Methods, 8(2), 129. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.8.2.129CrossRefPubMed

Baldi, P. L., Iannello, P., Riva, S., & Antonietti, A. (2013). Cognitive reflection and socially biased decisions. Studia Psychologica., 55(4), 265–271. https://doi.org/10.21909/sp.2013.04.641CrossRef

Bardi, A., Guerra, V. M., & Ramdeny, G. S. D. (2009). Openness and ambiguity intolerance: Their differential relations to well-being in the context of an academic life transition. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(3), 219–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.03.003CrossRef

Baron, J., Isler, O., & Yilmaz, O. (2022). Actively open-minded thinking and the political effects of its absence. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/g5jhp.

Baron, J., Scott, S., Fincher, K. S., & Metz, S. E. (2015). Why does the cognitive reflection test (sometimes) predict utilitarian moral judgment (and other things)? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4(3), 265–284.CrossRef

Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32(1), 439–476. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.002255CrossRef

Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence, and personality: A critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 132(4), 355–429. https://doi.org/10.3200/MONO.132.4.355-430CrossRefPubMed

Ben-Shachar, M. S., Lüdecke, D., & Makowski, D. (2020). effect size: Estimation of Effect Size Indices and Standardized Parameters. Journal of Open Source Software, 5(56), 2815.CrossRef

Bowden, E. M., & Jung-Beeman, M. (2003). Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 634–639.CrossRef

Brandt, M. J., Evans, A. M., & Crawford, J. T. (2015). The unthinking or confident extremist? Political extremists are more likely than moderates to reject experimenter-generated anchors. Psychological Science, 26(2), 189–202.PubMedCrossRef

Budescu, D. V. (1993). Dominance analysis: A new approach to the problem of relative importance of predictors in multiple regression. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 542. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.542CrossRef

Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30, 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02303.xCrossRefPubMed

Caligiuri, P. M., Jacobs, R. R., & Farr, J. L. (2000). The attitudinal and behavioral openness scale: Scale development and construct validation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(99)00021-8CrossRef

Cancer, A., Iannello, P., Salvi, C., & Antonietti, A. (2023a). Executive functioning and divergent thinking predict creative problem-solving in young adults and elderlies. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 87(2), 388–396.PubMedCrossRef

Cancer, A., Salvi, C., Antonietti, A., & Iannello, P. (2023b). Not getting vaccinated? It is a matter of problem-solving abilities and socio-cognitive polarization. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(3), 1721.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Carraro, L., Castelli, L., & Macchiella, C. (2011). The automatic conservative: Ideology-based attentional asymmetries in the processing of valenced information. PLoS ONE, 6(11), e26456. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0026456CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Chandler, J., Mueller, P., & Paolacci, G. (2014). Non- naivete among Amazon Mechanical Turk workers: Con- sequences and solutions for behavioral researchers. Be- Havioral Research Methods, 46(1), 112–130.CrossRef

Cools, R., & Robbins, T. W. (2004). Chemistry of the adaptive mind. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 362(1825), 2871–2888.CrossRef

Cristofori, I., Salvi, C., Beeman, M., & Grafman, J. (2018). The effects of expected reward on creative problem solving. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 18, 925–931.CrossRef

Davids, A. (1963). Psychodynamic and sociocultural factors related to intolerance of ambiguity. In R. W. White (Ed.), The study of lives (pp. 160–177). Atherton Press.

De Dreu, C. K., Baas, M., & Nijstad, B. A. (2008). Hedonic tone and activation level in the mood-creativity link: Toward a dual pathway to creativity model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(5), 739. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.739CrossRefPubMed

De Dreu, C. K., & Nijstad, B. A. (2008). Mental set and creative thought in social conflict: Threat rigidity versus motivated focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(3), 648–661.PubMedCrossRef

Deppe, K. D., Gonzalez, F. J., Neiman, J., Pahlke, J., Smith, K., & Hibbing, J. R. (2015). Reflective liberals and intuitive conservatives: A look at the Cognitive Reflection Test and ideology. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(4), 314–331.CrossRef

Eckhardt, W. (1991). Authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 12, 97–124.CrossRef

Erceg, N., Galić, Z., & Ružojčić, M. (2020). A reflection on cognitive reflection—Testing convergent/divergent validity of two measures of cognitive reflection. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(5), 741–755.CrossRef

Ferguson, S. L., Moore, G. E. W., & Hull, D. M. (2020). Finding latent groups in observed data: A primer on latent profile analysis in Mplus for applied researchers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 44(5), 458–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025419881721CrossRef

Fletcher, J. M., Marks, A. D., & Hine, D. W. (2012). Latent profile analysis of working memory capacity and thinking styles in adults and adolescents. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(1), 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.11.003CrossRef

Frankfurt, H. G. (2005). On bullshit (p. 67). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600701641920CrossRef

Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732CrossRef

Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1948). A study of prejudice in children. Human Relations, 1, 295–306.PubMedCrossRef

Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1949). Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable. Journal of Personality, 18, 108–143.CrossRef

Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1951). Personality theory and perception. In R. R. Blake & G. V. Ramsey (Eds.), Perception: An approach to personality (pp. 356–420). Ronald Press.CrossRef

Furnham, A., & Ribchester, T. (1995). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology., 14, 179–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686907CrossRef

Grant, D., & Berg, E. A. (1948). Abehavioral analysis ofdegree ofreinforcement and ease of shifting to new response in a Weigl-type card-sorting problem. Journal ofExperimental Psychology, 38, 404–411.

Greenberg, J., & Jonas, E. (2003). Psychological motives and polit- ical orientation—The left, the right, and the rigid: Comment on Jost et al. (2003). Psychological Bulletin, 129, 376–382.PubMedCrossRef

Greenway, T. S., Jin, J., Shepherd, A. M., & Schnitker, S. A. (2019). Beyond the liberal-conservative binary: Generosity, religion, and a latent profile analysis of moral foundations in a Christian sample. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(14), 1938–1964. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219850867CrossRef

Guilford, J. P., Christensen, P. R., Merrifield, P. R., & Wilson, R. C. (1978). Alternate uses: Manual of instructions and interpretations. Orange, CA: Sheridan Psychological Services.

Hardin, R. (2002). The crippled epistemology of extremism. In A. Breton, G. Galeotti, P. Salmon, & R. Wintrobe (Eds.), Political extremism and rationality (pp. 3–22). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.

Hennes, E. P., Nam, H. H., Stern, C., & Jost, J. T. (2012). Not all ideologies are created equal: Epistemic, existential, and relational needs predict system-justifying attitudes. Social Cognition, 30(6), 669–688. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2012.30.6.669CrossRef

Hirsh, J. B., Walberg, M. D., & Peterson, J. B. (2013). Spiritual liberals and religious conservatives. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(1), 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612444138CrossRef

Hommel, B., & Colzato, L. S. (2017). The social transmission of metacontrol policies: Mechanisms underlying the interpersonal transfer of persistence and flexibility. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 81, 43–58.PubMedCrossRef

Iannello, P., Mottini, A., Tirelli, S., Riva, S., & Antonietti, A. (2017). Ambiguity and uncertainty tolerance, need for cognition, and their association with stress. A study among Italian practicing physicians. Medical Education Online., 22, 1270009.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Ionescu, T. (2012). Exploring the nature of cognitive flexibility. New Ideas in Psychology, 30(2), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2011.11.001.CrossRef

Jerrim, J., Parker, P., & Shure, D. (2019). Bullshitters. Who are They and What Do We Know About Their Lives? IZA Discussion Paper No. 12282. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3390272. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3390272.

Jost, J. T. (2017). Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psychology, 38(2), 167–208.CrossRef

Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339CrossRefPubMed

Jost, J. T., & Krochik, M. (2014). Ideological differences in epistemic motivation: Implications for attitude structure, depth of information processing, susceptibility to persuasion, and stereotyping. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Advances in motivation science (pp. 181–231). Elsevier.

Kehagia, A. A., Murray, G. K., & Robbins, T. W. (2010). Learning and cognitive flexibility: Frontostriatal function and monoaminergic modulation. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 20(2), 199–204.PubMedCrossRef

Kemmelmeier, M. (2010). Authoritarianism and its relationship with intuitive-experiential cognitive style and heuristic processing. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(1), 44–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.08.012CrossRef

Kohn, P. M. (1974). Authoritarianism, rebelliousness, and their correlates among British undergraduates. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13, 245–255.PubMedCrossRef

Lammers, J., Koch, A., Conway, P., & Brandt, M. J. (2017). The political domain appears simpler to the politically extreme than to political moderates. Social Psychological and Personality Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616678456CrossRef

Lanza, S. T., Flaherty, B. P., & Collins, L. M. (2003). Latent class and latent transition analysis. Handbook of psychology (pp. 663–685). Wiley.

Lauriola, M., Foschi, R., Mosca, O., & Weller, J. (2016). Attitude toward ambiguity: Empirically robust factors in self-report personality scales. Assessment, 23(3), 353–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115577188CrossRefPubMed

Lauriola, M., Levin, I. P., & Hart, S. S. (2007). Common and distinct factors in decision making under ambiguity and risk: A psychomet- ric study of individual differences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes., 104, 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.04.001CrossRef

Lenth, R. (2021). emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R Package Version, 1(5), 4.

Lobato, E., Mendoza, J., Sims, V., & Chin, M. (2014). Examining the relationship between conspiracy theories, paranormal beliefs, and pseudoscience acceptance among a university population: Relationship between unwarranted beliefs. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(5), 617–625.CrossRef

Long, J. A. (2019). Interactions: Comprehensive, User-Friendly Toolkit for Probing Interactions.

Lubke, G. H., & Luningham, J. (2017). Fitting latent variable mixture models. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 98, 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2017.04.003CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lüdecke, D., Makowski, D., Waggoner, P., & Patil, I. (2020b). Package ‘performance’.

Lüdecke, D., Ben-Shachar, M. S., Patil, I., & Makowski, D. (2020a). Extracting, computing and exploring the parameters of statistical models using R. Journal of Open Source Software, 5(53), 2445.CrossRef

Lüdecke, D., Waggoner, P. D., & Makowski, D. (2019). Insight: A unified interface to access information from model objects in R. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(38), 1412.CrossRef

Macchi, L., & Bagassi, M. (2012). Intuitive and analytical processes in insight problem solving: A psycho-rhetorical approach to the study of reasoning. Mind & Society, 11(1), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-012-0103-3CrossRef

MacDonald, A. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1970.26.3.791CrossRefPubMed

MacGregor, J. N., & Cunningham, J. B. (2008). Rebus puzzles as insight problems. Behav Res, 40, 263–268. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.1.263CrossRef

Maples-Keller, J. L., Hyatt, C. S., Sleep, C. E., Stevens, J. S., Fenlon, E. E., Jovanovic, T., & Michopoulos, V. (2021). DSM–5 alternative model for personality disorders trait domains and PTSD symptoms in a sample of highly traumatized African American women and a prospective sample of trauma center patients. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000477CrossRef

Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Trautwein, U., & Morin, A. J. (2009). Classical latent profile analysis of academic self-concept dimensions: Synergy of person-and variable-centered approaches to theoretical models of self-concept. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(2), 191–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510902751010CrossRef

McGregor, I. (2006). Zeal appeal: The allure of moral extremes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28(4), 343–348. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2804_7CrossRef

McLain, D. L. (1993). The mstat-i: A new measure of an individual’s tolerance for ambiguity. Educational and Psychological Measurement., 53, 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053001020CrossRef

McLain, D. L. (2009). Evidence of the properties of an ambiguity tolerance measure: The multiple stimulus types ambiguity tolerance scale–II (MSTAT–II). Psychological Reports, 105(3), 975–988. https://doi.org/10.2466/PR0.105.3.975-988CrossRefPubMed

Merrotsy, P. (2013). Tolerance of ambiguity: A trait of the creative personality? Creativity Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2013.783762CrossRef

Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: Four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science., 21(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411429458CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Nilsson, A., Erlandsson, A., & Västfjäll, D. (2019). The complex relation between receptivity to pseudo-profound bullshit and political ideology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(10), 1440–1454.PubMedCrossRef

Nimon, K., Oswald, F., & Roberts, and J. K. (2021). yhat: Interpreting Regression Effects (2.0–3)

Oberski, D. (2016). Mixture models: Latent profile and latent class analysis. Modern statistical methods for HCI. Cham: Springer.

O’Connor, P. (1952). Ethnocentrism, intolerance of ambiguity and abstract reasoning ability. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 526–530.CrossRef

Oldrati, V., Patricelli, J., Colombo, B., & Antonietti, A. (2016). The role of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in inhibition mechanism: A study on cognitive reflection test and similar tasks through neuromodulation. Neuropsychologia, 91, 499–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.09.010CrossRefPubMed

Onraet, E., et al. (2015). The association of cognitive ability with right-wing ideological attitudes and prejudice: A meta-analytic review. European Journal of Personality., 29, 599–621.CrossRef

Pastor, D. A., Barron, K. E., Miller, B. J., & Davis, S. L. (2007). A latent profile analysis of college students’ achievement goal orientation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(1), 8–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.10.003CrossRef

Paulhus, D. L., Harms, P. D., Bruce, M. N., & Lysy, D. C. (2003). The overclaiming technique: Measuring self-enhancement independent of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 890–904. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.890CrossRefPubMed

Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(6), 16.CrossRef

Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2020). Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. Journal of Personality, 88, 185–200.PubMedCrossRef

Perry-Smith, J. E., & Mannucci, P. V. (2017). From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Academy of Management Review, 42(1), 53–79. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0462CrossRef

Phillips, D. L., & Clancy, K. J. (1972). Some effects of “social desirability” in survey studies. American Journal of Sociology, 77, 921–940. https://doi.org/10.1086/225231CrossRef

Priniski, J. H., McClay, M., & Holyoak, K. J. (2021). Rise of QAnon: A Mental Model of Good and Evil Stews in an Echochamber. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.04632.

R Core Team (2019). R Foundation for Statistical Computing. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna.

Rajagopal, L., & Hamouz, F. L. (2009). Use of food attitudes and be- haviors in determination of the personality characteristic of openness: A pilot study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33, 254–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2009.02.004CrossRef

Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1999). Measures of political attitudes. Academic Press.

Rollwage, M., Zmigrod, L., de Wit, L., Dolan, R. J., & Fleming, S. M. (2019). What underlies political polarization? A manifesto for computational political psychology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(10), 820–822.PubMedCrossRef

Rosenberg, J. M., Beymer, P. N., Anderson, D. J., Van Lissa, C. J., & Schmidt, J. A. (2019). tidyLPA: An R package to easily carry out latent profile analysis (LPA) using open-source or commercial software. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(30), 978. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00978CrossRef

Runco, M. (2004). Personal creativity and culture. In S. Lau, A. N. N. Hui, & G. Y. C. Ng (Eds.), Creativity: When East meets West (pp. 9–21). World Scientific.CrossRef

Salvi, C., Barr, N., Dunsmoor, J. E., & Grafman, J. (2022). Insight problem solving ability predicts reduced susceptibility to fake news, bullshit, and overclaiming. Thinking & Reasoning. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2022.2146191CrossRef

Salvi, C., Beeman, M., Bikson, M., McKinley, R., & Grafman, J. (2020b). TDCS to the right anterior temporal lobe facilitates insight problem-solving. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 1–10.CrossRef

Salvi, C., & Bowden, E. (2020). The relation between state and trait risk taking and problem-solving. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 84(5), 1235–1248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01152-yCrossRefPubMed

Salvi, C., Bricolo, E., Kounios, J., Bowden, E., & Beeman, M. (2016a). Insight solutions are correct more often than analytic solutions. Thinking & Reasoning, 22(4), 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2016.1141798CrossRef

Salvi, C., Costantini, G., Bricolo, E., Perugini, M., & Beeman, M. (2016b). Validation of Italian rebus puzzles and compound remote associate problems. Behavior Research Methods, 48(2), 664–685. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0597-9CrossRefPubMed

Salvi, C., Costantini, G., Pace, A., & Palmiero, M. (2018). Validation of the Italian remote associate test. Journal of Creative Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.345CrossRefPubMed

Salvi, C., Cristofori, I., Grafman, J., & Beeman, M. (2016c). Rapid communication: The politics of insight. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(6), 1064–1072. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1136338CrossRef

Salvi, C., Iannello, P., Cancer, A., McClay, M., Rago, S., Dunsmoor, J. E., & Antonietti, A. (2021a). Going viral: How fear, socio-cognitive polarization and problem-solving influence fake news detection and proliferation during COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Communication. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2020.562588CrossRef

Salvi, C., Leiker, E. K., Baricca, B., Molinari, M. A., Eleopra, R., Nichelli, P. F., & Dunsmoor, J. E. (2021b). The effect of dopaminergic replacement therapy on creative thinking and insight problem-solving in Parkinson’s disease patients. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 646448.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Salvi, C., Simoncini, C., Grafman, J., & Beeman, M. (2020a). Oculometric signature of switch into awareness? Pupil size predicts sudden insight whereas microsaccades predict problem-solving via analysis. NeuroImage, 217, 116933.PubMedCrossRef

Santarnecchi, E., Sprugnoli, G., Bricolo, E., Costantini, G., Liew, S. L., Musaeus, C. S., & Rossi, S. (2019). Gamma tACS over the temporal lobe increases the occurrence of Eureka moments. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 5778.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Sargent, M. J. (2004). Less thought, more punishment: Need for cognition predicts support for punitive responses to crime. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(11), 1485–1493. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264481CrossRefPubMed

Scrucca, L., Fop, M., Murphy, T. B., & Raftery, A. E. (2016). mclust 5: Clustering, classification, and density estimation using Gaussian finite mixture models. The R Journal, 8(1), 289.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Shafto, P., Coley, J. D., & Baldwin, D. (2007). Effects of time pressure on context-sensitive property induction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review., 14, 890–894. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194117CrossRef

Shen, W., Hommel, B., Yuan, Y., Chang, L., & Zhang, W. (2018). Risk-taking and creativity: Convergent, but not divergent thinking is better in low-risk takers. Creativity Research Journal, 30(2), 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2018.1446852CrossRef

Shen, W., Zhao, Y., Hommel, B., Yuan, Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, Z., & Gu, H. (2019). The impact of spontaneous and induced mood states on problem solving and memory. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 32, 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.03.002CrossRef

Sprugnoli, G., Rossi, S., Liew, S. L., Bricolo, E., Costantini, G., Salvi, C., & Santarnecchi, E. (2021). Enhancement of semantic integration reasoning by tRNS. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience., 21, 736–746.CrossRef

Sterling, J., Jost, J. T., & Pennycook, G. (2016). Are neoliberals more susceptible to bullshit? Judgment & Decision Making, 11(4), 352.CrossRef

Stern, C., West, T. V., Jost, J. T., & Rule, N. O. (2013). The politics of gaydar: Ideological differences in the use of gendered cues in categorizing sexual orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(3), 520. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031187CrossRefPubMed

Talhelm, T., Haidt, J., Oishi, S., Zhang, X., Miao, F. F., & Chen, S. (2015). Liberals think more analytically (more “WEIRD”) than conservatives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(2), 250–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214563672CrossRefPubMed

Tetlock, P. E. (2007). Psychology and politics: The challenges of integrating levels of analysis in social science. In E. T. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 888–912). Guilford.

Tetlock, P. E., Bernzweig, J., & Gallant, J. L. (1985). Supreme Court decision making: Cognitive style as a predictor of ideological consistency of voting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1227–1239.CrossRef

Thomson, K. S., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2016). Investigating an alternate form of the cognitive reflection test. Judgment and Decision Making, 11(1), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1423632CrossRef

Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the cognitive reflection test. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 147–168.CrossRef

van der Veer, K., Ommundsen, R., Yakushko, O., Higler, L., Woelders, S., & Hagen, K. A. (2013). Psychometrically and qualitatively validating a cross-national cumulative measure of fear-based xenophobia. Quality & Quantity, 47(3), 1429–1444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9599-6CrossRef

Van Hiel, A., Onraet, E., Crowson, H. M., & Roets, A. (2016). The relationship between right- wing attitudes and cognitive style: A comparison of self-report and behavioural measures of rigidity and intolerance of ambiguity. European Journal of Personality., 30, 523–531.CrossRef

van Prooijen, J. W., & Krouwel, A. P. M. (2020). Overclaiming knowledge predicts anti-establishment voting. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11, 356–363.CrossRef

van Prooijen, J.-W., Krouwel, A., Boiten, M., & Eendebak, L. (2015a). Fear among the extremes: How political ideolo- gy predicts negative emotions and outgroup derogation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 485–497.PubMedCrossRef

Van Prooijen, J. W., Krouwel, A. P., & Emmer, J. (2018). Ideological responses to the EU refugee crisis: The left, the right, and the extremes. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(2), 143–150.PubMedCrossRef

van Prooijen, J. W., Krouwel, A. P. M., & Pollet, T. V. (2015b). Political extremism predicts belief in conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614567356CrossRef

Vannoy, J. S. (1965). Generality of cognitive complexity±simplicity as a personality construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 385–396.PubMedCrossRef

Zmigrod, L. (2020). The role of cognitive rigidity in political ideologies: Theory, evidence, and future directions. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.10.016CrossRef

Zmigrod, L., Rentfrow, P. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2018). Cognitive underpinnings of nationalistic ideology in the context of Brexit. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(19), E4532–E4540. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708960115CrossRef

Zmigrod, L., Rentfrow, P. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2019). Cognitive inflexibility predicts extremist attitudes. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 989. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00989CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Zmigrod, L., Rentfrow, P. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2020). The partisan mind: Is extreme political partisanship related to cognitive inflexibility? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(3), 407.PubMedCrossRef

Zmigrod, L. (2022). Individual-Level Cognitive and Personality Predictors of Ideological Worldviews: The Psychological Profiles of Political, Nationalistic, Dogmatic, Religious, and Extreme Believers. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/srgup.

Titel: Does social rigidity predict cognitive rigidity? Profiles of socio-cognitive polarization
Auteurs: Carola Salvi
Paola Iannello
Alice Cancer
Samuel E. Cooper
Mason McClay
Joseph E. Dunsmoor
Alessandro Antonietti
Publicatiedatum: 06-05-2023
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 8/2023
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-023-01832-w

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 8/2023

The effects of self-selected background music and task difficulty on task engagement and performance in a visual vigilance task

Investigating the appraisal structure of spontaneous thoughts: evidence for differences among unexpected thought, involuntary autobiographical memories, and ruminative thought

The effect of incentivization on the conjunction fallacy in judgments: a meta-analysis

What we imagine learning from watching others: how motor imagery modulates competency perceptions resulting from the repeated observation of a juggling action

Effects of short-term hand immobilization on anticipatory mechanism for tool use

Beauty and the sharp fangs of the beast: degree of angularity predicts perceived preference and threat