University of Maryland DRUM  
University of Maryland Digital Repository at the University of Maryland

DRUM >
Theses and Dissertations from UMD >
UMD Theses and Dissertations >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1903/13256

Title: A Source for All Seasons?: The Need for Cognitive Closure and Preference for Generalized Epistemic Authorities
Authors: Sheveland, Anna C.
Advisors: Kruglanski, Arie W
Department/Program: Psychology
Type: Dissertation
Sponsors: Digital Repository at the University of Maryland
University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)
Subjects: Social psychology
Keywords: Epistemic authority
Means multifinality
Need for cognitive closure
Issue Date: 2012
Abstract: This research investigated the relationship between the need for cognitive closure (NFC) and preference for generalized (over specialized) epistemic authorities. Seven studies tested the hypotheses that: individuals dispositionally higher (vs. lower) in NFC (1) evaluate generalized epistemic authorities more positively relative to specialized epistemic authorities, (2) report relying on generalized epistemic authorities more heavily relative to specialized epistemic authorities, and have epistemic authority sets that (3) are smaller and (4) consist of more generalized epistemic authorities; and individuals in whom NFC is situationally heightened (vs. lowered) (5) evaluate generalized epistemic authorities more positively relative to specialized epistemic authorities, (6) report a greater readiness to rely on more generalized (vs. specialized) epistemic authorities, and (7) report liking and relying more heavily on epistemic authorities framed as multifinal (vs. unifinal) means. Whereas the first six hypotheses outlined above concern the nature of the relationship between NFC and epistemic authority preferences, the seventh concerns the proposed mechanism, means multifinality, through which this link is established. The findings were mixed. Participants dispositionally higher in NFC did have epistemic authority sets consisting of more generalized epistemic authorities (Pilot Study A) and exhibited greater implicit liking of generalized epistemic authorities relative to specialized epistemic authorities (Study 1); however, the latter result was not obtained with explicit, self-report measures of liking (Studies 1, 2a,b, and 4). Moreover, unexpected results were obtained regarding NFC's relation to reliance on generalized (vs. specialized) epistemic authorities, with individuals higher in NFC, both dispositionally and situationally, exhibiting greater reliance on specialized (vs. generalized) epistemic authorities (Studies 1, 3, and 4). Experimental evidence from Study 4 suggests the means multifinality mechanism proposed to link NFC and epistemic authority generalization preferences is, in fact, in play, at least with respect to epistemic authority reliance; however, it appears to operate in a fashion opposite that predicted by the original theory. Finally, as predicted, NFC was inversely related to epistemic authority set size (Study 3 and Pilot Study B). A revised theory is presented to account for these findings, implications of the present research are discussed, and avenues for future research are suggested.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1903/13256
Appears in Collections:Psychology Theses and Dissertations
UMD Theses and Dissertations

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormatNo. of Downloads
Sheveland_umd_0117E_13595.pdfRESTRICTED ACCESS698.24 kBAdobe PDF110View/Open

All items in DRUM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

 

DRUM is brought to you by the University of Maryland Libraries
University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7011 (301)314-1328.
Please send us your comments. -
All Contents