Kiedy potrzeba domknięcia sprzyja złożonemu poznaniu
Słowa kluczowe:
potrzeba domknięcia; strategia poznawcza; sądy społeczne; formowanie wiedzy; przetwarzanie informacji
Abstrakt
Teoria naiwnego poznania jest jednym z najbardziej wpływowych podejść opisujących proces nabywania wiedzy. Zgodnie z nią o przebiegu procesu epistemicznego decyduje w pierwszej kolejności motywacja do uzyskania domknięcia poznawczego. W większości przypadków duże natężenie tej motywacji wiąże się z uproszczonym i przyspieszonym przetwarzaniem informacji. Fakt ten może prowadzić do nadmiernie uproszczonego rozumienia tej zmiennej. W rzeczywistości istnieją przesłanki do twierdzenia, że w pewnych okolicznościach typowa zależność ulega odwróceniu. Artykuł zawiera przegląd badań potwierdzających to przewidywanie. Wyniki przeanalizowano ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem dwóch postulatów teorii: dwóch faz procesu epistemicznego i dwoistej natury potrzeby poznawczego domknięcia.
Bibliografia
Bar-Tal, Y. (1994). The effect on mundane decision-making of need and ability to achieve cognitive structure. European Journal of Personality, 8, 45-58.
Bar-Tal, Y., Kishon-Rabin, L., & Tabak, N. (1997). The effect of need and ability to achieve cognitive structuring on cognitive structuring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1158-1176.
Bar-Tal, Y., & Kossowska, M. (2010). The efficacy at fulfilling need for closure: The concept and its measurement. In J. P. Villanueva (Ed.), Personality traits: Classification, effects and changes (pp. 47-64). New York: Nova Publishers.
Bar-Tal, Y., Raviv, A., & Spitzer, A. (1999). The effect on coping of monitoring, blunting, and the ability to achieve cognitive structure. The Journal of Psychology, 133, 395-412.
Crocker, J., Hannah, D. B., & Weber, R. (1983). Person memory and causal attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 55-66.
Erb, H.-P., Kruglanski, A. W., Chun, W. Y., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Spiegel, S. (2003). Searching for commonalities in human judgment: The parametric unimodel and its dual mode alternatives. European Review of Social Psychology, 14, 1-47.
Evans, J. S. B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Ltd.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Freund, T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Shpitzajzen, A. (1985). The freezing and unfreezing of impressional primacy: Effects of the need for structure and the fear of invalidity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 479-487.
Houghton, D. C., & Grewal, R. (2000). Please, let’s get an answer – any answer: Need for consumer cognitive closure. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11), 911-934.
Jaśko, K., Czernatowicz-Kukuczka, A., Kossowska, M., & Czarna, A. (2015). Individual differences in response to uncertainty and decision making: The role of behavioral inhibition system and need for closure. Motivation and Emotion. doi: 10.1007/s11031-015-9478-x
Kosic, A., Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., & Mannetti, L. (2004). Social cognition of immigrants’ acculturation: Effects of the need for closure and the reference group at entry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 796-813.
Kossowska, M. (2005). Umysł niezmienny. Poznawcze mechanizmy sztywności. Cracow, PL: Jagiellonian University Press.
Kossowska, M., & Bar-Tal, Y. (2013). Need for closure and heuristic information processing: The moderating role of the ability to achieve the need for closure. British Journal of Psychology, 104(4), 457-480.
Kossowska, M., Dragon, P., & Bukowski, M. (2015). When need for closure leads to positive attitudes towards a negatively stereotyped outgroup. Motivation and Emotion, 39, 88-98.
Kossowska, M., & Jaśko, K. (2013). Need and ability in knowledge formation process. In D. Cervone, M. W. Eysenck, M. Fajkowska, & T. Maruszewski (Eds.), Personality dynamics: Embodiment, meaning construction, and the social world (pp. 109-123). Clinton Corners, NY: Eliot Werner Publications. Warsaw lectures on personality and social psychology, vol. 3.
Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York: Plenum.
Kruglanski, A. W. (1990). Lay epistemic theory in social cognitive psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 181-197.
Kruglanski, A. W. (2004). The psychology of closed mindedness. New York: Psychology Press.
Kruglanski, A. W., Dechesne, M., Orehek, E., & Pierro, A. (2009). Three decades of lay epistemics: The why, how, and who of knowledge formation. European Review of Social Psychology, 20, 146-191.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Freund, T. (1983). The freezing and unfreezing of lay inferences: Effects of impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping and numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448-468.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Mayseless, O. (1988). Contextual effects in hypothesis testing: The role of 742 competing alternatives and epistemic motivations. Social Cognition, 6, 1-21.
Kruglanski, A. W., Peri, N., & Zakai, D. (1991). Interactive effects of need for closure and initial confidence on social information seeking. Social Cognition, 9(2), 127-148.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Thompson, E. P. (1999). Persuasion by a single route: A view from the unimodel. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 83-109.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1991). Group members’ reactions to opinion deviates and conformists at varying degrees of proximity to decision deadline and of environmental noise. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 212-225.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”. Psychological Review, 103, 263-283.
Kruglanski, A. W., Webster, D. M., & Klem, A. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 861-876.
Mayseless, O., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1987). What makes you so sure? Effects of epistemic motivations on judgmental confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 162-183.
McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., & Lowell, E. L. (1953). The achievement motive. East Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Miller, G. A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: A historical perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 141-144.
Neuberg, S. L., Judice, T. N., & West, S. G. (1997). What the Need for Closure Scale measures and what it does not measure: Toward differentiating among related epistemic motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1396-1412.
Neuberg, S. L., West, S. G., Judice, T. N., & Thompson, M. M. (1997). On dimensionality, discriminant validity, the role of psychometric analyses in personality theory, measurement: Reply to Kruglanski et al.’s defense of the Need for Closure Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1017-1029.
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books.
Roerts, A., Kruglanski, A. W., Kossowska, M., Pierro, A., & Hong, Y. (2015). The motivated gatekeeper of our minds: New directions in need for closure theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. doi: 10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.01.001
Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2007). Separating ability from need: Clarifying the dimensional structure of the need for closure scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 266-280.
Roets, A., Van Hiel, A., & Cornelis, I. (2006). The dimensional structure of the Need for Cognitive Closure Scale: Relationships with “seizing‘‘ and “freezing‘‘ processes. Social Cognition, 24, 22-45.
Strojny, P. (2015). Cognitive sources of social knowledge formation process (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Jagiellonian University Institute of Psychology, Cracow, PL.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1130.
Vermeir, I., Van Kenhove, P., & Hendrickx, H. (2002). The influence of need for closure on consumer’s choice behaviour. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(6), 703-727.
Wason, P. C. (1966). Reasoning. In B. M. Foss (Ed.), New horizons in psychology (pp. 113-135). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Webster, D. (1993). Motivated augmentation and reduction of the overattribution bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 261-271.
Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049-1062.
Bar-Tal, Y., Kishon-Rabin, L., & Tabak, N. (1997). The effect of need and ability to achieve cognitive structuring on cognitive structuring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1158-1176.
Bar-Tal, Y., & Kossowska, M. (2010). The efficacy at fulfilling need for closure: The concept and its measurement. In J. P. Villanueva (Ed.), Personality traits: Classification, effects and changes (pp. 47-64). New York: Nova Publishers.
Bar-Tal, Y., Raviv, A., & Spitzer, A. (1999). The effect on coping of monitoring, blunting, and the ability to achieve cognitive structure. The Journal of Psychology, 133, 395-412.
Crocker, J., Hannah, D. B., & Weber, R. (1983). Person memory and causal attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 55-66.
Erb, H.-P., Kruglanski, A. W., Chun, W. Y., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Spiegel, S. (2003). Searching for commonalities in human judgment: The parametric unimodel and its dual mode alternatives. European Review of Social Psychology, 14, 1-47.
Evans, J. S. B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Ltd.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Freund, T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Shpitzajzen, A. (1985). The freezing and unfreezing of impressional primacy: Effects of the need for structure and the fear of invalidity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 479-487.
Houghton, D. C., & Grewal, R. (2000). Please, let’s get an answer – any answer: Need for consumer cognitive closure. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11), 911-934.
Jaśko, K., Czernatowicz-Kukuczka, A., Kossowska, M., & Czarna, A. (2015). Individual differences in response to uncertainty and decision making: The role of behavioral inhibition system and need for closure. Motivation and Emotion. doi: 10.1007/s11031-015-9478-x
Kosic, A., Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., & Mannetti, L. (2004). Social cognition of immigrants’ acculturation: Effects of the need for closure and the reference group at entry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 796-813.
Kossowska, M. (2005). Umysł niezmienny. Poznawcze mechanizmy sztywności. Cracow, PL: Jagiellonian University Press.
Kossowska, M., & Bar-Tal, Y. (2013). Need for closure and heuristic information processing: The moderating role of the ability to achieve the need for closure. British Journal of Psychology, 104(4), 457-480.
Kossowska, M., Dragon, P., & Bukowski, M. (2015). When need for closure leads to positive attitudes towards a negatively stereotyped outgroup. Motivation and Emotion, 39, 88-98.
Kossowska, M., & Jaśko, K. (2013). Need and ability in knowledge formation process. In D. Cervone, M. W. Eysenck, M. Fajkowska, & T. Maruszewski (Eds.), Personality dynamics: Embodiment, meaning construction, and the social world (pp. 109-123). Clinton Corners, NY: Eliot Werner Publications. Warsaw lectures on personality and social psychology, vol. 3.
Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York: Plenum.
Kruglanski, A. W. (1990). Lay epistemic theory in social cognitive psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 181-197.
Kruglanski, A. W. (2004). The psychology of closed mindedness. New York: Psychology Press.
Kruglanski, A. W., Dechesne, M., Orehek, E., & Pierro, A. (2009). Three decades of lay epistemics: The why, how, and who of knowledge formation. European Review of Social Psychology, 20, 146-191.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Freund, T. (1983). The freezing and unfreezing of lay inferences: Effects of impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping and numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448-468.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Mayseless, O. (1988). Contextual effects in hypothesis testing: The role of 742 competing alternatives and epistemic motivations. Social Cognition, 6, 1-21.
Kruglanski, A. W., Peri, N., & Zakai, D. (1991). Interactive effects of need for closure and initial confidence on social information seeking. Social Cognition, 9(2), 127-148.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Thompson, E. P. (1999). Persuasion by a single route: A view from the unimodel. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 83-109.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1991). Group members’ reactions to opinion deviates and conformists at varying degrees of proximity to decision deadline and of environmental noise. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 212-225.
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”. Psychological Review, 103, 263-283.
Kruglanski, A. W., Webster, D. M., & Klem, A. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 861-876.
Mayseless, O., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1987). What makes you so sure? Effects of epistemic motivations on judgmental confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 162-183.
McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., & Lowell, E. L. (1953). The achievement motive. East Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Miller, G. A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: A historical perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 141-144.
Neuberg, S. L., Judice, T. N., & West, S. G. (1997). What the Need for Closure Scale measures and what it does not measure: Toward differentiating among related epistemic motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1396-1412.
Neuberg, S. L., West, S. G., Judice, T. N., & Thompson, M. M. (1997). On dimensionality, discriminant validity, the role of psychometric analyses in personality theory, measurement: Reply to Kruglanski et al.’s defense of the Need for Closure Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1017-1029.
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books.
Roerts, A., Kruglanski, A. W., Kossowska, M., Pierro, A., & Hong, Y. (2015). The motivated gatekeeper of our minds: New directions in need for closure theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. doi: 10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.01.001
Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2007). Separating ability from need: Clarifying the dimensional structure of the need for closure scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 266-280.
Roets, A., Van Hiel, A., & Cornelis, I. (2006). The dimensional structure of the Need for Cognitive Closure Scale: Relationships with “seizing‘‘ and “freezing‘‘ processes. Social Cognition, 24, 22-45.
Strojny, P. (2015). Cognitive sources of social knowledge formation process (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Jagiellonian University Institute of Psychology, Cracow, PL.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1130.
Vermeir, I., Van Kenhove, P., & Hendrickx, H. (2002). The influence of need for closure on consumer’s choice behaviour. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(6), 703-727.
Wason, P. C. (1966). Reasoning. In B. M. Foss (Ed.), New horizons in psychology (pp. 113-135). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Webster, D. (1993). Motivated augmentation and reduction of the overattribution bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 261-271.
Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049-1062.
Opublikowane
2019-04-05
Numer
Dział
Artykuły
Copyright (c) 2016 Roczniki Psychologiczne
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
