Dogmatism and predecisional information search.

Long, Barbara H.; Ziller, Robert C.

doi:10.1037/h0022476

Cited by 55 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mann, 1977) to suggest that enhanced awareness of possible negative consequences improves decision quality. These two facts, taken by themselves, would lead one to expect more dogmatic persons to make better decisions, reversing the negative picture of dogmatic persons painted by Rokeach (1960) and Long and Ziller (1965).An additional fact, however, suggests that, even if this much is granted, a qualification may be in order. The well-supported (see Anderson, 1975, p. 155) Yerkes-Dodson law states that problem-solving performance is at its best at an intermediate, rather than at an extremely high or extremely low, level of motivation or conflict.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Again, this finding was not linked to any personality variables. Long and Ziller (1965) did link pre-decisional information search to closedmindedness, specifically, to Rokeach's D-scale. They theorized, as did Rokeach (1960), that high D-scale individuals would be closed to new information.…”

Section: Pruitt (1961) Specifically Focused On How Many Pieces Of Infmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The four major hypotheses under examination in the present study are based upon the earlier cited research ·findings provided by Long and Ziller (1965), Pruitt (1961), Taylor (1972 and Taylor and Dunnette (1974), as well as the theoretical positions adopted by Rokeach (1960) and retained in somewhat altered form by Janis and Mann (1977). Hypothesis IV concerns Decision Accuracy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Closedmindedness as a predictor of individual decision-making behaviors

Jolin

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The measures of decision-making behaviors were obtained from four decision situations developed by the experimenter. Closedmindedness was assessed using Rokeach's (1960) Dogmatism (D) scale.Persons with high D-scores tended to arrive at decisions on the basis of less information than persons with low D-scores (r = -.22, p < .05) and to make more appropriate use of information (r = +. 40, p < • 01) , yet they showed no tendency to differ in either accuracy (r = +.06, p > .05) or confidence (r = -.18, p> .05). Furthermore, they showed no tendency to be less able to reverse an earlier decision (r = +.04, p>. .05). of a decision but also in decision-making behaviors. Variations in --decision-making behaviors are attributab+e, at least in part, to the individual's emotional make-up and the relationship of the emotional make-up to the individual's cognitive structure. Frenkel-Brunswick (1949) is prominent among the many who have pointed to this relationship between personality and cognitive variables. She found that variations in parental behavior result in yariations in the child's ability to tolerate ambiguity. According to Vacchiano et al. (1969), later studies have supported this view.One personality dimension that has been linked widely with cognitive functioning is dogmatism, or closedmindedness. Rokeach (1954) defines closedmindedness "(a) a relatively closed cognitive organisation of beliefs and disbeliefs about reality, (b) organized around a central set of beliefs about absolute authority which in turn, (c) provides a framework for patterns of intolerance toward others" (p. 195). Rokeach's measure of closedmindedness is dogmatism (D-scale). Allport (1947) observed, many years ago, that whether or not facts are ignored or falsified is the result of both intellectual and emotional forces existing in the individual. Ignoring or falsifying facts on the basis of value structures present in the individual has the potential effect of warding 2 off threats from reality (Allport, 1947). At the same time, according to Maslow (1954), it gives the individual the feeling of understanding reality. Thus, closedmindedness has come to be seen as a cognitive defense mechanism. One would expect· it to discriminate individual decision-making behaviors.This study focuses on two pre-decisional and two post-decisional aspects of decision-making behavior. The pre-decisional behaviors meas- Table ·1 for a sunrrnary comparison of selected findings.).Pruitt (1961) specifically focused on how many pieces of information were requested by an individual prior to making a decision. His subjects were asked to decide whether a red or a green light was more likely to flash. Information consisted of a sequence of flashes of these lights.Under one condition, a subject could make this decision only once per sequence, whereas under another condition, prior to seeing any lights, an initial decisio~ had to be made, but this decision could later be changed once. Using the expected-value model of decision-making, Pruitt calculated the expecte...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Pruitt (1961) Specifically Focused On How Many Pieces Of Infmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Closedmindedness as a predictor of individual decision-making behaviors

Jolin

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A subject is asked to indicate whether each of 40 statements is true or false, his score being the number with which he agrees. Scores on this scale have been found to relate negatively to predecision search for information (Long & Ziller, 1965). The nondogmatic individual tends to seek out adequate information before making a decision, whereas the dogmatic individual is willing to express an opinion with only a paucity of information.…”

Section: Individual Difference Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Bayesian Decisions Artificially Intelligent? The Effect of Task and Personality on Conservatism in Probabilistic Inference1

Alker

Hermann

1970

ETS Research Bulletin Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 2 × 3 design was used to explore the effects of complexity and importance of decision on conservatism in probabilistic inference. 120 undergraduate males considered either two or three alternatives for one of three problems differing in perceived importance. Upon receiving certain information, subjects indicated which of the several alternative explanations for their problem was more or most probable. These probability statements were compared with “optimal” probabilities arrived at using Bayes' theorem. The more important and complex the decisions were perceived to be, the more conservative the subjects were when compared to “optimal” Bayesian values (p < .01). The differences were more pronounced as the number of alternatives to be considered increased (p < .01). Seven individual difference variables measuring adequacy in processing information were unrelated to conservatism. A process analysis suggested that strongly held initial opinions can limit the judged relevance of subsequent information and, in turn, affect the “optimal” Bayesian decision.

show abstract

Toward a conceptualization of mail survey response behavior

Childers

Skinner

1996

Psychol. Mark.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dogmatism and predecisional information search.

Cited by 55 publications

References 7 publications

Closedmindedness as a predictor of individual decision-making behaviors

Closedmindedness as a predictor of individual decision-making behaviors

Are Bayesian Decisions Artificially Intelligent? The Effect of Task and Personality on Conservatism in Probabilistic Inference1

Toward a conceptualization of mail survey response behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About