Miroslav I. Yasin
Moscow International University
Evgeniya S. Guseva
Academician S.P. Korolev Samara National Research University
Study of relations between cognitive closure and locus of control
Yasin M.I., Guseva E.S., Study of relations between cognitive closure and locus of control. Vestnik of Kostroma State University. Series: Pedagogy. Psychology. Sociokinetics, 2024, vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 36-41. https://doi.org/10.34216/2073-1426-2024-30-1-36-41
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34216/2073-1426-2024-30-1-36-41
УДК: 159.983
Publish date: 2024-04-11
Annotation: The need for cognitive closure is a natural mental process leading to obtaining the most unambiguous information and cutting off incorrect, ambiguous, debatable, and uncertain data. The study poses the question whether the aspiration for the most specific information can be associated with locus of control, as a person’s subjective idea of the reasons for the situations happening to him. To test the assumption, we used: the test questionnaire “Diagnostics of partial positions of personal internality-externality” developed by E.F. Bazhin and colleagues based on the scale “Study of Subjective Control” by J. Rotter and the full version of the questionnaire “The Need for Cognitive Closure” by A. Kruglyansky, in Russian adaptation (M.I. Yasin, O.E. Khukhlaev). The sample consisted of 80 subjects aged from 19 to 26 years, university students. It was found that the “Decision” scale of the cognitive closedness questionnaire is positively related to “Internality” with values of r = 0.266, with p < 0.018, and with an average degree of reliability (1-β) = 0.514. However, decisiveness is considered a separate construct that does not contribute to cognitive closure as such. The remaining four scales of the test of cognitive closure (“Striving for order”, “Striving for predictability”, “Avoiding duality” and “Striving for closed thinking” did not show significant connections with the locus of control (internality), that is, cognitive closure is not associated with the locus of control.
Keywords: cognitive closure, locus of control, internality, decisiveness, tolerance for ambiguity, uncertainty
Literature list: Bazhin E.F., Golynkina E.A., Etkind A.M. Metod issledovaniya urovnya subektivnogo kontrolya [Method for studying the level of subjective control]. Psihologicheskij zhurnal [Psychological Journal], 1984, No. 3 (5), pp. 152-162. (In Russ.) Didenko A.V., Alenina O.K., Oglezneva A.V. Potrebnost v kognitivnom zakrytii u pacientov s socialnoj fobiej [Need for Cognitive Closure in Patients with Social Phobia]. Klinicheskaya i specialnaya psihologiya [Clinical Psychology and Special Education], 2022, vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 70-91. https://doi.org/10.17759/cpse.2022110403 (In Russ.) Fetiskin N.P., Kozlov V.V., Manujlov G.M. Socialno-psihologicheskaya diagnostika razvitiya lichnosti i malyh grupp [Socio-psychological diagnostics of personality development and small groups]. Moscow, 2002, 488 p. (In Russ.) Guseva E.S., Chernov A.Yu., Vzaimosvyaz tolerantnosti k neopredelennosti s sostavlyayushchimi lichnoj religioznosti [The relationship between tolerance for uncertainty and the components of personal religiosity]. Chelovek v usloviyah neopredelennosti: sb. nauch. trudov [Man in conditions of uncertainty: collection of scientific papers], ed. by E.V. Bakshutova. Samara, 2022, pp. 117-121. (In Russ.) Khukhlaev O.E., Pavlova O.S. ‟Mne izvestno, chto mne nichego ne izvestno”: socialno-kognitivnye predposylki podderzhki radikalnyh vzglyadov [“I Know that I don’t Know Anything”: Socio-Cognitive Antecedents of the Radicalization]. Socialnaya psihologiya i obshchestvo [Social psychology and society], 2021, vol. 3 (12), pp. 87-102. https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2021120307 (In Russ.) Yasin M.I. Koncepciya kognitivnoj zakrytosti: istoriya i smezhnye ponyatiya [Сognitive closure concept: history and relevant notions]. Vestnik Kostromskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser.: Pedagogika. Psihologiya. Sociokinetika [Vestnik of Kostroma State University. Series: Pedagogy. Psychology. Sociokinetics], 2020, vol. 1 (26). С. 174-181. https://doi.org/10.34216/2073-1426-2020-26-1-174-181 (In Russ.) Yasin M.I., Khukhlaev O.E Russkoyazychnaya adaptaciya oprosnika D. Vebster i A. Kurglyanski ‟Stremlenie k kognitivnomu zakrytosti” [Russian-Language Adaptation of the Questionnaire D. Webster and A. Kruglyanski “The Need for Cognitive Closure”]. Psihologiya: Zhurnal VSHE [Psychology: Journal of the Higher School of Economics], 2023, vol. 2 (20), pp. 282-302. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2023-2-282-299. (In Russ.) Yasin M.I., Ryabichenko T.A. Kognitivnye prediktory gibridnoj i alternativnoj identifikacii v polikulturnoj srede: obzor zarubezhnyh issledovanij [Cognitive predictors of hybrid and alternative identification in multicultural environment: review of foreign studies]. Sovremennaya zarubezhnaya psihologiya [Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology], 2021, vol. 10 (3), pp. 79-91. https://doi.org/10.17759/jmfp.2021100308 (In Russ.) Borah P. The moderating role of political ideology: Need for cognition, media locus of control, misinformation efficacy, and misperceptions about COVID-19. International Journal of Communication, 2022, vol. 16, рр. 26. Jost J.T., Glaser J., Kruglanski A.W., Sulloway F.J. Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 2003, vol. 129, рр. 339-375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339 Kossowska M., van Hie A., Chun W.Y., Kruglanski A.W. The Need for Cognitive Closure Scale: Structure, cross-cultural invariance, and comparison of mean ratings between European American and East Asian samples. Psychologica Belgica, 2002, vol. 42 (4), рр. 267-286. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.998 Kruglanski A.W. Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York, Springer, 1989, 282 р. McManus I.C., Woolf K., Martin C.A., et al. Vaccine hesitancy for COVID-19 explored in a phenomic study of 259 socio-cognitive-behavioural measures in the UK-REACH study of 12,431 UK healthcare workers. MedRxiv, 2021, A.2021.12.08.21267421. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050647 Neuberg S.L., Judice T.N., West S.G. What the need for cognitive closure scale measures and what it does not: toward the differentiating of epistemic motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997, vol. 72, рр. 1396-1412. Roets A., Hiel A. Van. Allport’s prejudiced personality today: Need for closure as the motivated cognitive basis of prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2011, vol. 20 (6), рр. 349-354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411424894 Roets A., van Hiel A., Dhon K. Is sexism a gender issue? A motivated social cognition perspective on men’s and women’s sexist attitudes toward own and other gender. European Journal of Personality, 2012, vol. 26, рр. 350-359. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.843 Saroglou V. Beyond dogmatism: the need for closure as related to religion. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 2002, vol. 5 (2), рр. 183-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674670210144130 Van Assche J., Bostyn D., De Keersmaecker J., Dardenne B., Hansenne M. Intergroup reconciliation between Flemings and Walloons: The predictive value of cognitive style, authoritarian ideology, and intergroup emotions. Psychologica Belgica, 2017, vol. 57 (3), рр. 132-155. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.333 Webster D.M., Kruglanski A.W. Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1994, vol. 67 (6), рр. 1049-1062.
Author's info: Miroslav I. Yasin, Candidate of Sociological Sciences, Associate Professor, Moscow International University, Moscow, Russia, Yasin.MI@yandex.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6249-8527
Co-author's info: Evgeniya S. Guseva , Academician S.P. Korolev Samara National Research University, Samara, Russia, Guseva-es@maul.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0060-6710