Previous research has demonstrated that the political ideology one adopts is strongly influenced by three social-cognitive motives: motives to reduce uncertainty, manage threats, and experience solidarity. The goal of the current studies was to examine the possibility that this relationship might also work in reverse, with political ideology influencing social-cognitive motives. To this end, four studies examined the impact of conservative cues on need for cognitive closure (NFCC), a measure of motivation to reduce uncertainty, and tested between three accounts of the impact of conservative cues on selective exposure (SE) to confirming information, the primary measure of NFCC in the current studies. Studies 1-3 examined how exposure to the American flag, a conservative cue, impacted SE (Studies 1 and 3) and the accessibility of NFCC (Study 2). Study 4 examined how exposure to partisan news sources impacted SE. Exposure to conservative cues may increase SE by making political group membership salient, resulting in the defensive engagement in SE to maintain a positive view of one's political in-group (social identity account), or by priming the political stereotype that conservatives are high in NFCC, which individuals (stereotype priming account) or only conservatives (active self-concept account) assimilate towards. The four studies produced mixed results, but overall, were most supportive of the stereotype priming account. Specifically, there was evidence that exposure to conservative cues increased SE (Studies 1 and 3) and made NFCC more accessible (Study 2). Additionally, these results were not moderated by political ideology, as predicted by the active self-concept account, and there was no evidence of increased affiliation with one's political in-group, as predicted by the social identity account. In Study 4, exposure to the conservative news source reduced SE compared to exposure to the moderate and liberal news sources, results inconsistent with all three accounts. Theoretical and practical implications, as well the complexities of the current studies' results, are discussed.

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(情報学) / 甲第22805号 / 情博第735号 / 新制||情||126(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院情報学研究科社会情報学専攻 / (主査)教授 吉川 正俊, 教授 森 信介, 教授 田島 敬史 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Informatics / Kyoto University / DFAM

No description available.

The purpose of this research study was to determine if there is a correlation between personality type and level of confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is the idea that people are more likely to agree with opinions already similar to their own and they will actively seek out that opinion. The NEO Five Factor Inventory was administered to determine the subjects’ levels in openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. The Confirmation Inventory was administered to determine the level of confirmation bias. It was predicted that people high in openness will score low in confirmation bias; people who score high in conscientiousness will score high in confirmation bias; high levels of agreeableness will result in low scores of confirmation bias; and the final hypothesis is people who score high in neuroticism will also score high levels of confirmation bias. It is predicted that a person's level of extraversion will not affect their level of confirmation bias. The low participant number caused non-significant results. Overall, no significant differences were found that illuminate the relationship between confirmation bias and personality. None of the comparisons were found to be significant at the .01 level.

With the growing popularity of social media platforms like Facebook, human interaction in online environments is increasing. As a result, social perceptions of the individuals "behind the screen" has become a topic that needs to be explored. The present study explores how the media platform (specifically Facebook post versus Video) affects perceptions of an individual with a controversial opinion. Potentially, the same content in a video format may increase the likability of the presenter in contrast to reading the same opinions in Facebook posts. The present study examined the role of alignment of opinion (agree vs. disagree with presenter) and content modality (Facebook video vs. Facebook text post) on participants' perception of likeability towards the online persona. In this study, three hypotheses were tested. The first hypothesis is that video posts will generally yield more likability for the presenter about a controversial issue than the same content in a Facebook post. Second, people who agree with the presenter's position of a controversial issue will find the person posting more likable. Finally, an interaction is expected such that likability will be most affected for the participants who disagree with the presenter; specifically those participants who disagree will be more likely to like the presenter in the video condition, whereas format will matter less for those who agree with the presenter's opinion. The dependent variables of the present study are the Interpersonal Adjective Scale (IAS, Trapnell & Wiggins 1990) and scores on the Basic Empathy Scale in Adults (BES-A, Jolliffe and Farrington, 2006).

No description available.

A total of 168 undergraduate students at Temple University provided a measure of their prior beliefs and measures of attitude strength on three topics and then attempted to identify and explain informal reasoning fallacies based on the same topics. Contrary to the hypothesized predictions, prior beliefs and measures of attitude strength did not have a significant effect on participants' ability to accept informal reasoning fallacies consistent with their beliefs based on that topic, although agreement with the topic demonstrated modest effects. Furthermore, this research demonstrated that participants have significant difficulty identifying and explaining informal logical fallacies. Ability to identify and explain one informal fallacy is not a significant predictor of the ability to identify and explain other fallacies. Also, ability to identify and explain one fallacy in a topic is a poor predictor of the ability to identify and explain that fallacy in another topic. This research indicates that formal fallacy syllogism scores were the best predictor of the ability to identify and explain informal logical fallacies, and that agreement with the topic and willingness to act on those beliefs demonstrated modest effects. Consistent with studies on dual-processing theory, in informal logic the individual is forced to examine the information presented in the statement and the structure of the statement and then relate it to their prior opinions and attitudes about the topic, and therefore, the acceptance of the fallacy is a matter of motivated reasoning bias or self-deception instead of an error in analytical reasoning. Informal reasoning fallacies represented an error in judgment, or a misunderstanding of the validity of an argument. Practical implications for school psychologists, limitations of this research, and directions for future research were discussed. / School Psychology

Conceptual design is a series of complex cognitive processing tasks and research seeking to further understand design cognition will benefit by considering literature from the field of psychology. This thesis presents two research projects, which sought to understand and mitigate design biases in conceptual design through the application of theories from biological and cognitive psychology. The first of these puts forward a novel model of design creativity based on connectionist theory and a neurological phenomenon known as long-term potentiation. This model is applied to provide new insights into design fixation and develop interventions to assist designers overcome fixation. The second project seeks to establish that cognitive heuristics and biases predictably influence design cognition. Two studies are discussed that examined the role of confirmation bias in design. The first establishes that confirmation bias is present during concept generation; the second demonstrates that decision matrices can mitigate confirmation bias in concept evaluation.

Conceptual design is a series of complex cognitive processing tasks and research seeking to further understand design cognition will benefit by considering literature from the field of psychology. This thesis presents two research projects, which sought to understand and mitigate design biases in conceptual design through the application of theories from biological and cognitive psychology. The first of these puts forward a novel model of design creativity based on connectionist theory and a neurological phenomenon known as long-term potentiation. This model is applied to provide new insights into design fixation and develop interventions to assist designers overcome fixation. The second project seeks to establish that cognitive heuristics and biases predictably influence design cognition. Two studies are discussed that examined the role of confirmation bias in design. The first establishes that confirmation bias is present during concept generation; the second demonstrates that decision matrices can mitigate confirmation bias in concept evaluation.

Cognitive Science is an interdisciplinary field that ties together the curricula of liberal arts and technical fields of study. However, it is de-emphasized in technical undergraduate studies such as Engineering. Cognitive Science is essentially the study of the human mind and how humans process information. It is the study of human responses, thinking, and perception. Human behavior and a person’s reaction are undetermined, but it can be better understood. Although human behavior and interaction is a routine part of life, engineers are taught to decipher code and not how to decipher a human’s behavior. Cognitive Science affects all aspects in the work environment. Organizational practices can be improved by understanding common biases and motivational theories in people. Having a cognitive awareness of typical human behavior will help to promote improved communication and positive reactions from people in the workplace. Human behavior is inevitable in any field but more crucial in technical fields especially when there is lack of communication or ambiguous guidelines and definitions. In technical fields, miscommunication or ambiguity can be a matter of life or death. In many situations, miscommunication can drive ambiguity. Although some people are happy with flexible guidelines, others seek to have well defined expectations. How do people react in situations surrounding miscommunication or ambiguity? In both situations, some people create opportunities and others become a hindrance. Processes and procedures can be put in place to alleviate ambiguous situations, but human performance and psychological factors still play a role as well. Human error can result from psychological factors, but the environment can be improved to limit those factors. As with any situation, mishaps are still prone to happen. Although human error is preventable in most cases, it’s never completely unavoidable. Human error continues to be a deep-rooted cause that can lead to negative outcomes. As stated by Alexander Pope, “to err is human…” (Moncur). This paper will explore underlying human behavior in daily activities. By understanding common biases and motivational theories driving human behavior, one can address negative behavior in a technical field in order to create opportunities. / text