Taxonomies of psychological individual differences: biological perspectives on millennia-long challenges

Trofimova, Irina; Robbins, Trevor W.; Sulis, William; Uher, Jana

doi:10.1098/rstb.2017.0152

Cited by 42 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, there are neurocognitive dispositionsenduring biologically-based dispositional tendencies in processing, evaluating, and responding to stimuli -that guide individuals' behaviour and decision making. These neurocognitive dispositions are stable over time and typically not under explicit conscious control (Trofimova et al, 2018).…”

Section: The Neurocognitive Model Of Ideological Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Neurocognitive Model of Ideological Thinking

Zmigrod¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ideological behaviour has been traditionally viewed as a product of social forces. Nonetheless, an emerging science is suggesting that ideological worldviews can also be understood in terms of neural and cognitive principles. The paper proposes a Neurocognitive Model of Ideological Thinking, which argues that ideological worldviews may be manifestations of individuals’ perceptual and cognitive systems. The Neurocognitive Model makes two essential claims. Firstly, there are neurocognitive antecedents to ideological thinking: the brain’s low-level neurocognitive dispositions influence its receptivity to ideological doctrines. And secondly, there are neurocognitive consequences to ideological engagement: strong exposure and adherence to ideological doctrines can shape perceptual and cognitive systems. The paper details the Neurocognitive Model of Ideological Thinking and synthesizes the empirical evidence in support of its claims. The model postulates that there are bidirectional processes between the brain and the ideological environment, and so it can address the roles of situational and motivational factors in ideologically-motivated action. This endeavour highlights that an interdisciplinary neurocognitive approach to ideologies can facilitate biologically-informed accounts of the ideological brain and thus reveal who is most susceptible to extreme and authoritarian ideologies. Consequently, by investigating the relationships between low-level perceptual processes and high-level ideological attitudes, we can develop a better grasp of our collective history as well as the mechanisms that may structure our political futures.

show abstract

Section: The Neurocognitive Model Of Ideological Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Neurocognitive Model of Ideological Thinking

Zmigrod¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, associations among functionally-related behaviours are often only moderate or absent such as occurrences of non-contact and contact aggression (Uher et al 2013a;Uher 2015b). This may explain why redundancy-based methods of data analysis (e.g., factor analysis) are hardly used outside of psychology and social sciences (Uher 2015d;Trofimova et al 2018).…”

Section: Psychometric Instruments and 'Measurement' Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement in metrology, psychology and social sciences: data generation traceability and numerical traceability as basic methodological principles applicable across sciences

Uher

2020

Qual Quant

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measurement creates trustworthy quantifications. But unified frameworks applicable to all sciences are still lacking and discipline-specific terms, concepts and practices hamper mutual understanding and identification of commonalities and differences. Transdisciplinary and philosophy-of-science analyses are used to compare metrologists' structural framework of physical measurement with psychologists' and social scientists' fiat measurement of constructs. The analyses explore the functions that measuring instruments and measurement-executing persons in themselves fulfil in data generation processes, and identify two basic methodological principles critical for measurement. (1) Data generation traceability requires that numerical assignments depend on the properties to be quantified in the study objects (object-dependence). Therefore, scientists must establish unbroken documented connection chains that directly link (via different steps) the quantitative entity to be measured in the study property with the numerical value assigned to it, thereby making the assignment process fully transparent, traceable and thus reproducible. (2) Numerical traceability requires that scientists also directly link the assigned numerical value to known standards in documented and transparent ways, thereby establishing the results' public interpretability (subject-independence). The article demonstrates how these principles can be meaningfully applied to psychical and social phenomena, considering their peculiarities and inherent limitations, revealing that not constructs in themselves but only their indicators (proxies) can be measured. These foundational concepts allow to distinguish measurement-based quantifications from other (subjective) quantifications that may be useful for pragmatic purposes but lack epistemic authority, which is particularly important for applied (e.g., legal, clinical) contexts. They also highlight new avenues for establishing transparency and replicability in empirical sciences.

show abstract

“…But such methods are inadequate for analysing the nonlinear relationships found in most psychological and physiological processes in which redundancy rarely occurs [12,[20][21][22]. Instead, statistical methods are needed that enable the identification of fluid processes that interact with one another in a contingent, nonlinear, multi-level and feedback manner that still presents profound challenges for their mathematical formalization [8,10,13]. (4) Finally, language-based methods mislead participants and researchers alike in the understanding and interpretation of the kinds of phenomena that can actually be captured in empirical studies.…”

Section: (B) Analysing the Working Principles Of Biological Systems: mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity in action: exchange of perspectives and reflections on taxonomies of individual differences

Uher

Trofimova

Sulis

et al. 2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Throughout the last 2500 years, the classification of individual differences in healthy people and their extreme expressions in mental disorders has remained one of the most difficult challenges in science that affects our ability to explore individuals' functioning, underlying psychobiological processes and pathways of development. To facilitate analyses of the principles required for studying individual differences, this theme issue brought together prominent scholars from diverse backgrounds of which many bring unique combinations of cross-disciplinary experiences and perspectives that help establish connections and promote exchange across disciplines. This final paper presents brief commentaries of some of our authors and further scholars exchanging perspectives and reflecting on the contributions of this theme issue.This article is part of the theme issue 'Diverse perspectives on diversity: multi-disciplinary approaches to taxonomies of individual differences'.

show abstract

Taxonomies of psychological individual differences: biological perspectives on millennia-long challenges

Cited by 42 publications

References 63 publications

A Neurocognitive Model of Ideological Thinking

A Neurocognitive Model of Ideological Thinking

Measurement in metrology, psychology and social sciences: data generation traceability and numerical traceability as basic methodological principles applicable across sciences

Diversity in action: exchange of perspectives and reflections on taxonomies of individual differences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About