Delineating between scientism and science enthusiasm: Challenges in measuring scientism and the development of novel scale.

Scientism proposes science to be an all-powerful human enterprise, able to answer not only all practical but also philosophical or moral questions. We are taking a psychological approach to scientism, studying uncritical trust in science and uncritical trust in scientists as a part of a unique attitudinal tendency. Our novel measure assesses both kinds of trust through short Thurstone scales allowing us to establish a clear threshold for endorsing scientism, thus effectively delineating it from science enthusiasm, which previous instruments were unable to do. We built and refined a novel scale through five stages in which we consulted relevant literature, experts, and laypeople. We demonstrated that uncritical trust in science and scientists are interrelated, yet distinct constructs. As expected, these two subscales positively correlated with dogmatism, scientific knowledge, and overclaiming, but not with knowledge overestimation. The results suggest the new instrument is reliable, valid, and suitable for the lay public.

Novel Psychosocial Correlates of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Cross-Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: Effective COVID-19 vaccines have been available since early 2021 yet many Americans refuse or delayed uptake. As of mid-2022, still around 30% of US adults remain unvaccinated against COVID-19. The majority (81%) of these unvaccinated adults say they will "definitely not" be getting the COVID-19 vaccine. Understanding the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake is critical to reducing death and illness from the virus, as well as to inform future vaccine efforts, such as the more recent bivalent (omicron) booster. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to expand our understanding of psychosocial determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. We focus on both COVID-19-specific factors, such as COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, as well as more global personality attributes such as dogmatism, reactance, gender roles, political beliefs, and religiosity. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey in mid-2021 of a representative sample of 1376 adults measuring both COVID-19-specific beliefs and attitudes, as well as global personality attributes. COVID-19 vaccination status is reported at 3 levels: vaccinated; unvaccinated-may-get-it; unvaccinated-hard-no. RESULTS: Our analyses focused on the correlation of COVID-19 vaccination status with 10 psychosocial attributes: COVID-19-specific conspiracy theory beliefs; COVID-19 vaccine misinformation; COVID-19-related Rapture beliefs; general antivaccination beliefs; trait reactance; trait dogmatism; belief in 2020 election fraud; belief in a QAnon conspiracy; health care system distrust; and identification with traditional gender roles. We used a multivariate analysis of covariance to examine mean differences across vaccine status groups for each of the correlates while holding constant the effects of age, gender, race, income, education, political party, and Evangelicalism. Across the 10 psychosocial correlates, several different response scales were used. To allow for comparison of effects across correlates, measures of effect size were computed by converting correlates to z scores and then examining adjusted mean differences in z scores between the groups. We found that all 10 psychosocial variables were significantly associated with vaccination status. After general antivaccination beliefs, COVID-19 misinformation beliefs and COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs had the largest effect on vaccine uptake. CONCLUSIONS: The association of these psychosocial factors with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy may help explain why vaccine uptake has not shifted much among the unvaccinated-hard-no group since vaccines became available. These findings deepen our understanding of those who remain resistant to getting vaccinated and can guide more effective tailored communications to reach them. Health communication professionals may apply lessons learned from countering related beliefs and personality attributes around issues such as climate change and other forms of vaccine hesitancy. For example, using motivational interviewing strategies that are equipped to handle resistance and provide correct information in a delicate manner that avoids reactance.

The neurobiology of openness as a personality trait.

Openness is a multifaceted behavioral disposition that encompasses personal, interpersonal, and cultural dimensions. It has been suggested that the interindividual variability in openness as a personality trait is influenced by various environmental and genetic factors, as well as differences in brain functional and structural connectivity patterns along with their various associated cognitive processes. Alterations in degree of openness have been linked to several aspects of health and disease, being impacted by both physical and mental health, substance use, and neurologic conditions. This review aims to explore the current state of knowledge describing the neurobiological basis of openness and how individual differences in openness can manifest in brain health and disease.

Ethnocentrism in Austria - Historical data.

This data article offers three inter-connected, historical datasets regarding consumer ethnocentrism in Austria. (1) The first dataset (cet-dev) was used for scale development. It replicates and extends the US-CETSCALE, developed by Shimp and Sharma [1]. It was drawn on a quota-sampling technique (n = 1105), representative of the Austrian population in 1993 and examines perceptions regarding foreign-made products. (2) The second dataset (cet-val) was used for scale validation, again drawn from a representative sample of the Austrian population in 1993-1994 (n = 1069), and (3) the third dataset (cet-xtrmgrp) drew on a snowball sample of members of the Austrian army (n = 105) and members of export-oriented firms (n = 72), thus providing an 'extreme group' validation opportunity for the Austrian CETSCALE. The data can be reused for factor analytic multivariate procedures, to test antecedents and consequences of consumer ethnocentrism in the Austrian context and provide historic value, if pooled and reused with contemporary data.

Development and Validation of Religious Sectarian Intolerance Scale for Muslim Adults in Pakistan.

Religious sectarian intolerance occurs when members of different religious sects within a faith are unable to tolerate the religious beliefs and practices of each resulting in bigotry and prejudice toward each other. The present research sought to develop a psychometrically sound measure of religious sectarian intolerance for Muslim adults. The research comprised two studies. Study I involved the development of an initial item pool for the Religious Sectarian Intolerance Scale (RSIS). The initial pool of items was based on thematic analysis from focus group discussions. This item pool was reviewed by a committee of experts resulting in a 39-item initial draft of the RSIS, which was administered to a purposive sample of Pakistani Muslim adults (N = 270). The exploratory factor analysis revealed a four-factor structure for the RSIS (with loadings ranging from 0.56 to 0.94) that explained 62% of the variance. The factors include dogmatic loyalty (9 items), social intolerance (13 items), renunciation of other religious Sects. (8 items), and propagation of one's Sect. (9 items). All factors were moderately related to each other with acceptable Cronbach's alpha (.78 to .92). Study II replicated the factorial structure of RSIS through confirmatory factor analysis on an independent sample of Muslim adults (N = 274). The convergent validity of the RSIS was demonstrated by a positive relationship with dogmatism. Overall, the findings indicated that the RSIS is a psychometrically sound measure that provides a standard operationalization for religious sectarian intolerance in Muslim cultures and it needs to be studied further in Muslim populations across the globe.

Preregistered Replication of "Feeling Superior Is a Bipartisan Issue: Extremity (Not Direction) of Political Views Predicts Perceived Belief Superiority".

There is currently a debate in political psychology about whether dogmatism and belief superiority are symmetric or asymmetric across the ideological spectrum. Toner, Leary, Asher, and Jongman-Sereno (2013) found that dogmatism was higher among conservatives than liberals, but both conservatives and liberals with extreme attitudes reported higher perceived superiority of beliefs. In the current study, we conducted a preregistered direct and conceptual replication of this previous research using a large nationally representative sample. Consistent with Toner et al.'s findings, our results showed that conservatives had higher dogmatism scores than liberals, whereas both conservative and liberal extreme attitudes were associated with higher belief superiority compared with more moderate attitudes. As in their study, we also found that whether conservative or liberal attitudes were associated with higher belief superiority was topic dependent. Contrasting Toner et al.'s findings, our results also showed that ideologically extreme individuals had higher dogmatism. We discuss implications of these results for theoretical debates in political psychology.

The cognitive and perceptual correlates of ideological attitudes: a data-driven approach.

Although human existence is enveloped by ideologies, remarkably little is understood about the relationships between ideological attitudes and psychological traits. Even less is known about how cognitive dispositions-individual differences in how information is perceived and processed- sculpt individuals' ideological worldviews, proclivities for extremist beliefs and resistance (or receptivity) to evidence. Using an unprecedented number of cognitive tasks (n = 37) and personality surveys (n = 22), along with data-driven analyses including drift-diffusion and Bayesian modelling, we uncovered the specific psychological signatures of political, nationalistic, religious and dogmatic beliefs. Cognitive and personality assessments consistently outperformed demographic predictors in accounting for individual differences in ideological preferences by 4 to 15-fold. Furthermore, data-driven analyses revealed that individuals' ideological attitudes mirrored their cognitive decision-making strategies. Conservatism and nationalism were related to greater caution in perceptual decision-making tasks and to reduced strategic information processing, while dogmatism was associated with slower evidence accumulation and impulsive tendencies. Religiosity was implicated in heightened agreeableness and risk perception. Extreme pro-group attitudes, including violence endorsement against outgroups, were linked to poorer working memory, slower perceptual strategies, and tendencies towards impulsivity and sensation-seeking-reflecting overlaps with the psychological profiles of conservatism and dogmatism. Cognitive and personality signatures were also generated for ideologies such as authoritarianism, system justification, social dominance orientation, patriotism and receptivity to evidence or alternative viewpoints; elucidating their underpinnings and highlighting avenues for future research. Together these findings suggest that ideological worldviews may be reflective of low-level perceptual and cognitive functions. This article is part of the theme issue 'The political brain: neurocognitive and computational mechanisms'.

The Curious Case of Left-Wing Authoritarianism: When Authoritarian Persons Meet Anti-Authoritarian Norms.

Left-Wing Authoritarianism (LWA) has a controversial history in psychology. Some researchers have expressed skepticism about the existence of LWA, whereas others have argued that LWA is a valid construct. In the present article, we offer a framework to reconcile these two perspectives by proposing that ideologically-based authoritarian norms are sometimes in conflict with the processes that create authoritarian individuals. In Western political contexts, authoritarian norms are more likely to occur on the conservative side of the political spectrum; but authoritarian attributes can occur in both conservatives and liberals. In our model, left-wing authoritarians thus often occupy the space where forces influencing authoritarianism are in conflict. We review existing evidence related to the model, present novel evidence related to the model, derive four hypotheses from the model, and discuss criteria for falsifying the model. We conclude by considering the model's place in current research on the complexities of ideology.

Does a Fundamentalist Mindset Predict a State or Trait Anxiety? The Covariate Role of Dogmatism.

Recent neuropsychological studies reported that fundamentalism beliefs and its cognitive mindset provoke sense of coherency and protection against the ambiguity as well as a rapid doubt resolution and thus offer relief from distress and uncertainty. In this study, we examined whether the need for closure dimensions predicted religious fundamentalism. Further, we tested if pronounced religious beliefs (also controlled for dogmatism) would be associated with a state or trait anxiety, in a sample of 388 Roman Catholics (females = 53.9%). Path analysis (SEM), with observed variables, was used to determine the pathways by which religious fundamentalism, need for closure dimensions, and dogmatism interacted to influence anxiety. The results revealed that religious fundamentalism was predicted by intolerance to ambiguity, preference for order, and closed-mindedness; in turn, high fundamentalism scores predicted state anxiety exclusively. Additionally, when controlling for dogmatism, the fundamentalism-anxiety path became nonsignificant. Although it seemed that fundamentalism beliefs "per se" have played no direct anxiolytic effect, they partially perform a function of avoiding chaos and disorder in order to maintain cognitive integrity.

Dogmatism manifests in lowered information search under uncertainty.

When knowledge is scarce, it is adaptive to seek further information to resolve uncertainty and obtain a more accurate worldview. Biases in such information-seeking behavior can contribute to the maintenance of inaccurate views. Here, we investigate whether predispositions for uncertainty-guided information seeking relate to individual differences in dogmatism, a phenomenon linked to entrenched beliefs in political, scientific, and religious discourse. We addressed this question in a perceptual decision-making task, allowing us to rule out motivational factors and isolate the role of uncertainty. In two independent general population samples (n = 370 and n = 364), we show that more dogmatic participants are less likely to seek out new information to refine an initial perceptual decision, leading to a reduction in overall belief accuracy despite similar initial decision performance. Trial-by-trial modeling revealed that dogmatic participants placed less reliance on internal signals of uncertainty (confidence) to guide information search, rendering them less likely to seek additional information to update beliefs derived from weak or uncertain initial evidence. Together, our results highlight a cognitive mechanism that may contribute to the formation of dogmatic worldviews.

On Energy Efficiency and the Brain's Resistance to Change: The Neurological Evolution of Dogmatism and Close-Mindedness.

The brain has been described as very resistant to change. However, why it does this has not been fully explained. In this paper, I propose that resilience to the disruption of consolidated memory is at the heart of the brain's resistance to change, and this resilience is a consequence of its energy efficiency evolutionary adaptations. I discussed the implications of this energy efficiency adaptation on dogmatism, close-mindedness, and artificial intelligence.

What Makes You So Sure? Dogmatism, Fundamentalism, Analytic Thinking, Perspective Taking and Moral Concern in the Religious and Nonreligious.

Better understanding the psychological factors related to certainty in one's beliefs (i.e., dogmatism) has important consequences for both individuals and social groups. Generally, beliefs can find support from at least two different routes of information processing: social/moral considerations or analytic/empirical reasoning. Here, we investigate how these two psychological constructs relate to dogmatism in two groups of individuals who preferentially draw on the former or latter sort of information when forming beliefs about the world-religious and nonreligious individuals. Across two studies and their pooled analysis, we provide evidence that although dogmatism is negatively related to analytic reasoning in both groups of individuals, it shares a divergent relationship with measures of moral concern depending on whether one identifies as religious or not. Study 1 showed that increasing levels of dogmatism were positively related to prosocial intentions among the religious and negatively related to empathic concern among the nonreligious. Study 2 replicated and extended these results by showing that perspective taking is negatively related to dogmatism in both groups, an effect which is particularly robust among the nonreligious. Study 2 also showed that religious fundamentalism was positively related to measures of moral concern among the religious. Because the current studies used a content-neutral measure to assess dogmatic certainty in one's beliefs, they have the potential to inform practices for most effectively communicating with and persuading religious and nonreligious individuals to change maladaptive behavior, even when the mode of discourse is unrelated to religious belief.

Un voto contra el dogmatismo metodológico en la confección de tablas o cuadros / Voting against the methodological dogmatism in designing tables or charts

Al parecer, se ha orientado por algunos revisores, asesores, o tutores de tesis que el nombre correcto para designar al artificio mediante el cual se resume la información gráficamente es cuadro y no tabla. Peor aún, se exige que no contengan líneas verticales pues ello significa que la investigación está cerrada. Por lo comunes que resultan afirmaciones de esta naturaleza, el presente artículo intenta desmontar estas ideas, buscar sus posibles causas, y finalmente, hacer algunas sugerencias de cómo deberían proceder tanto los autores de trabajos científicos como los oponentes de tesis(AU)

Apparently, some thesis reviewers, advisors, or tutors have instructed that the correct name to define the artifice by which information is graphically summarized is chart instead of table. Even worse is the requirement that it should not have vertical lines because this means that the research study is closed. Since these instructions have become so common, the present article attempts to break up these ideas, to look for their possible causes, and finally, to make some suggestions as to how the authors of scientific papers and thesis opponents should proceed(AU)

Dogmatism and Happiness.

BACKGROUND: Happiness is a drive and constructive force of life. A person feels wellbeing under different effective factors. Religious dogmatism that has an influence on the entire world is one of the depreciatory factors of happiness or wellbeing. The current study decided to analyze the relation between dogmatism and wellbeing, and according to a model, answer the following question: how does religious dogmatism decrease wellbeing? METHODS: This study is a correlation research. Population of study includes all people with 30-50 yr old who live in Tehran, Iran, in 2015. Among all, 180 subjects were selected as in access sample. The Oxford happiness questionnaire and Rokeach dogmatism scale were used. Data were analyzed by Pearson correlation test. RESULTS: There is a significant negative correlation between dogmatism and happiness (α=0.05). CONCLUSION: Dogmatism is one of the factors that have a negative effect on wellbeing. Religious dogmatism is the most dangerous factor against wellbeing. Dogmatic individuals have an inflexible cognitive system that emerges as a stable personality trait and decreases their adjustment with environment. Affective well-being and cognitive wellbeing are affected by individual adjustment. Therefore, in dogmatic individuals with low adjustment, the decrease of affective well-being and cognitive wellbeing is inevitable. This process will result in decrease of happiness and increase of aggression.

Is Color Experience Cognitively Penetrable?

Is color experience cognitively penetrable? Some philosophers have recently argued that it is. In this paper, we take issue with the claim that color experience is cognitively penetrable. We argue that the notion of cognitive penetration that has recently dominated the literature is flawed since it fails to distinguish between the modulation of perceptual content by non-perceptual principles and genuine cognitive penetration. We use this distinction to show that studies suggesting that color experience can be modulated by factors of the cognitive system do not establish that color experience is cognitively penetrable. Additionally, we argue that even if color experience turns out to be modulated by color-related beliefs and knowledge beyond non-perceptual principles, it does not follow that color experience is cognitively penetrable since the experiences of determinate hues involve post-perceptual processes. We conclude with a brief discussion of the implications that these ideas may have on debates in philosophy.

Contesting epistemic authority: Conspiracy theories on the boundaries of science.

Conspiracy theories are immensely popular today, yet in the social sciences they are often dismissed as "irrational," "bad science," or "religious belief." In this study, we take a cultural sociological approach and argue that this persistent disqualification is a form of "boundary work" that obscures rather than clarifies how and why conspiracy theorists challenge the epistemic authority of science. Based on a qualitative study of the Dutch conspiracy milieu, we distinguish three critiques that are motivated by encounters with scientific experts in everyday life: the alleged dogmatism of modern science, the intimate relation of scientific knowledge production with vested interests, and the exclusion of lay knowledge by scientific experts forming a global "power elite." Given their critique that resonates with social scientific understandings of science, it is concluded that conspiracy theorists compete with (social) scientists in complex battles for epistemic authority in a broader field of knowledge contestation.

El estudio del autoritarismo en el continuo ideológico-político / The study of authoritarianism in the political ideology

Este artículo examina las diferentes corrientes de investigación que estudiaron al fenómeno del autoritarismo desde una perspectiva psicológica. Se consideran los límites y alcances de los trabajos del Grupo de Berkeley acerca de la personalidad autoritaria y del Dogmatismo de Rokeach para establecer la especificidad de la relevancia de los estudio de Altemeyer acerca del autoritarismo del ala de derechas. Luego, se analiza la posibilidad del estudio del autoritarismo en el continuo ideológico- político de izquierdas. Finalmente se señala la potencialidad de los aportes de Funke para avanzar en el esclarecimiento del conflicto teoría-empiria en torno al fenómeno.

This article examines the different strands of research that studied the phenomenon of authoritarianism from a psychological perspective. We consider the limits and scope of the work of the Group of Berkeley about the authoritarian personality and the Rokeach Dogmatism to establish the speciicity of the relevance of the study of Altemeyer about right-wing authoritarianism. Then it examines whether the study of authoritarianism in the ongoing political and ideological left. Finally it points out the potential contributions of Funke to advance in solving the conlict theory, empiricism on the phenomenon.