Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Need for Closure Scale× | Motivated Reasoning Experiment× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Psihologie politică | Psihologie politică |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 1994 | 2006 |
| Autorul original≠ | Donna M. Webster & Arie W. Kruglanski | Charles Taber & Milton Lodge |
| Tip≠ | Self-report individual-difference scale | Survey/lab experiment |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1049-1062. DOI ↗ | Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-769. DOI ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative | NFCS, Need for Cognitive Closure Scale, Webster-Kruglanski Scale | Directional Motivated Reasoning Study, Biased Assimilation Experiment, Disconfirmation Bias Paradigm |
| Înrudite | 4 | 4 |
| Rezumat≠ | The Need for Cognitive Closure Scale, developed by Webster and Kruglanski (1994), measures a stable individual difference in the desire for a firm, definite answer to a question and an aversion to ambiguity and uncertainty. High need for closure is a key epistemic-motivation construct in political psychology, linked to conservatism, prejudice, intolerance of dissent, and resistance to belief change. | A motivated reasoning experiment tests whether people process political information to reach conclusions they are directionally motivated to hold rather than the most accurate ones. Building on Kunda's (1990) theory and crystallized by Taber and Lodge (2006), these designs expose partisans to attitude-congruent and incongruent arguments and measure biased assimilation, disconfirmation bias, attitude polarization, and selective exposure. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|