The relationship between cognitive style and political orientation depends on the measures used

Onurcan Yılmaz · S. Adil Sarıbay

56 citations0/0 files storedJudgment and Decision Making

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics Social and Intergroup Psychology Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

Abstract

Abstract The present research investigated the reason for mixed evidence concerning the relationship between analytic cognitive style (ACS) and political orientation in previous research. Most past research operationalized ACS with the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), which has been criticized as relying heavily on numeracy skills, and operationalized political orientation with the single-item self-placement measure, which has been criticized as masking the distinction between social and economic conservatism. The present research recruited an Amazon Mechanical Turk sample and, for the first time, simultaneously employed three separate ACS measures (CRT, CRT2, Baserate conflict problems), a measure of attitudes toward self-critical and reflective thinking (the Actively Open-Minded Thinking Scale; AOT), and separate measures of social and economic conservatism, as well the standard measure of political orientation. As expected, the total ACS score (combination of the separate measures) was negatively related to social, but not economic, conservatism. However, the CRT by itself was not related to conservatism, in parallel with some past findings, while the two other measures of ACS showed the same pattern as the combined score. Trait reflectiveness (AOT) was related negatively to all measures of political conservatism (social, economic, and general). Results clearly suggest that the conclusion reached regarding the ACS-political orientation relationship depends on the measure(s) used, with the measure most commonly employed in past research (CRT) behaving differently than other measures. Future research must further pursue the implications of the known differences (e.g., reliance on numeracy vs. verbal skills) of ACS measures and distinguish different senses of reflectiveness.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 56 citations exist upstream.

References

1904The Proof and Measurement of Association between Two Things 2005Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making 2003Political conservatism as motivated social cognition.2013Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition 2003In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning 2013Ideology, motivated reasoning, and cognitive reflection 1999The Problem of Units and the Circumstance for POMP 2013Understanding the Determinants of Political Ideology: Implications of Structural Complexity

Cited by

2019False Equivalence: Are Liberals and Conservatives in the United States Equally Biased?2021Cognitive reflection, cognitive intelligence, and cognitive abilities: A meta-analysis 2018Cognitive Reflection and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election 2019The need for intellectual diversity in psychological science: Our own studies of actively open-minded thinking as a case study 2017The relation between different types of religiosity and analytic cognitive style

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.