Dealing with Complexity in Society:From Plurality of Data to Synthetic Indicators
How Critically Open-minded Are We? A new synthetic social index
S A Hamed Hosseini,The University of Newcastle
Lawrence J SahaThe Australian National University
synthetic social index
September 17th and 18th, 2015 1
The Australian National University
Opening SessionOUTLINE
1.1.1.1. IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction– Aims: an open-minded approach to composing an open-mindedness
indexindex– Social and theoretical background
2.2.2.2. Conceptual FrameworkConceptual FrameworkConceptual FrameworkConceptual Framework– Open-mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?– Critical Open-mindedness: why critical?
3.3.3.3. Constructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical OpenConstructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical OpenConstructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical OpenConstructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical Open----mindedness mindedness mindedness mindedness – Constructing Composite Dimensional Indicators of Critical Openness:
Social, Political, Cultural, Economic, Environmental – Synthesizing Dimensional Composite Indicators: Constructing COI
Dealing with Complexity in society 2Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 2
– Synthesizing Dimensional Composite Indicators: Constructing COI– An Integrative Pragmatic Method of Composition,
4.4.4.4. External ValidationExternal ValidationExternal ValidationExternal Validation– Validation of COI and its dimensional CIs through Regression and Path Analysis;
External Validity, Content Validity, Reliability of Composite, – Disaggregation through path analysis and typological analysis
5.5.5.5. Findings and discussion Findings and discussion Findings and discussion Findings and discussion
Opening SessionINTRODUCTION
Aims
1. (Re-)introduce ‘critical open-mindedness’ as a new sociological concept, which can be employed particularly in the studies of concept, which can be employed particularly in the studies of social attitudes, social values, identities, and racial and perceptual discriminations.
2. Develop a relevant Synthetic Social IndexSynthetic Social IndexSynthetic Social IndexSynthetic Social Index comprising five social sub-indicators/dimensions for the purpose of both primary and secondary quantitative data analyses.
3. By processing the secondary data produced through the World
Dealing with Complexity in society 3Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 3
3. By processing the secondary data produced through the World Values Surveys in Australia in 2005 and 2012, the application of the ‘Critical Open‘Critical Open‘Critical Open‘Critical Open----mindedness Index’ (COI) mindedness Index’ (COI) mindedness Index’ (COI) mindedness Index’ (COI) is examined and the findings are discussed.
Opening SessionINTRODUCTION
Aims
4. Develop an index of Cognitive OpenCognitive OpenCognitive OpenCognitive Open----mindedness mindedness mindedness mindedness based on a number of social-psychological indicators drawn from the same data number of social-psychological indicators drawn from the same data sets.
5. Propose an integrative approach that aims to flexibly draw on the advantages of existing methods. The decisions on how to integrate methods of composition are pragmatically made, depending on the nature of data, the validity of the end results and the objectives of the study.
6. Propose a new method of penalization in this process based on the
Dealing with Complexity in society 4Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 4
6. Propose a new method of penalization in this process based on the ‘variation/deviation from the maximum’ across the sub-indicators.
7. Examine the external validity of the results based on the regression of the COI on sensibly predicting factors in order to validate the CIs and thereby choose the most suitable method of integration.
Opening SessionINTRODUCTION
Social and Theoretical Background
• Australia and the question of multiculturalism, economic challenges in the age of neoliberal globalism, economic challenges in the age of neoliberal globalism, terrorism, radicalism, rise of Islamophobia, new racism, refugee crisesrefugee crisesrefugee crisesrefugee crises (boat people), climate change, growing inequalities and austerity regimes, youth disenfranchisement with democracy, gay marriage, etc.
Question of open-mindedness in such context where tolerance and mutual understanding across social chasms are vital for the social cohesion
Dealing with Complexity in society 5Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 5
chasms are vital for the social cohesionCan the currently heightening emotional empathies for refugees in Australia (Europe and other Western societies) be translated into broader socio-political actions for addressing the structural roots of the crisis.
Opening SessionINTRODUCTION
Social and Theoretical Background
• In cognitive psychologycognitive psychologycognitive psychologycognitive psychology, openness is seen as intra-individual ideational capacity• In political and social psychologypolitical and social psychologypolitical and social psychologypolitical and social psychology, cognitive/personality studies of dogmatism-intolerance among different social groups have also focused on open-intolerance among different social groups have also focused on open-mindedness as an individual’s attribute more distinctively defined in relation to out-groups, ideologies and social values
• Models and scalesscalesscalesscales are developed, from F scale to D scale to DOG and RWA scales, etc.
• Management and organizational studiesManagement and organizational studiesManagement and organizational studiesManagement and organizational studies: open-mindedness in relationships and its impact on team performance
• Educational studiesEducational studiesEducational studiesEducational studies: Drawing on cognitive psychology, some researchers in this field are interested to investigate the relationship between democratic educational systems and student’s ability to pursue inquiry, to be self-critical and
Dealing with Complexity in society 6Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 6
educational systems and student’s ability to pursue inquiry, to be self-critical and learn from experience.
• Open-mindedness has also appeared as a philosophical conceptphilosophical conceptphilosophical conceptphilosophical concept. The implications of open-mindedness as a intellectual property or virtue (i.e. “willingness to form and revise ideas in the light of a critical review of evidence and argument”) for empirical studies
• No significant sociological attempt to address openness but there are many No significant sociological attempt to address openness but there are many No significant sociological attempt to address openness but there are many No significant sociological attempt to address openness but there are many studies of issues that can be directly related to itstudies of issues that can be directly related to itstudies of issues that can be directly related to itstudies of issues that can be directly related to it!
Opening SessionCONCETPTUAL FRAMEWORK
OpenOpenOpenOpen----mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?
• Rokeach’s D scale, • Criticisms of Rokeach, Controversies around the nature • Criticisms of Rokeach, Controversies around the nature of openness;
• A review of revised scales since the 1960s. • The dilemmas of defining Open-mindedness:– Cognitive vs. Collective; personal or societal property?– Passive vs. Critical, – Moral virtue or another ideological tool,
Dealing with Complexity in society 7Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 7
– Moral virtue or another ideological tool, – Contextual or universal,
• Our approach is integrative rather than reductionist, explore the relationship between the cognitive and the collective.
Opening SessionCONCETPTUAL FRAMEWORK
OpenOpenOpenOpen----mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?mindedness: a cognitive quality or a collective feature?
CognitiveOpenness1 CognitiveOpenness1 CognitiveOpenness1 CognitiveOpenness1 is composed of the following indicators/questions after their adjustments for direction: indicators/questions after their adjustments for direction:
Q4e (teaching tolerance to children), Q4j (teaching obedience to children), Q6 (trusting most people), Q11 (people are fair to me), Q20b (I seek to be myself regardless of what others think), Q23 (country’s aim 1), Q24 (country’s aim 2), Q27a (Schwartz personality: Creative and Innovative), Q27e (Personality: benevolent), Q27j (Personality: Critical but not rejectionist towards traditions), Q40 (non-fatalistic view), Q43d (critical
Dealing with Complexity in society 8Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 8
Q27j (Personality: Critical but not rejectionist towards traditions), Q40 (non-fatalistic view), Q43d (critical trusting of unknown person), Q45a (a strong leader needed), Q45b (experts must rule). After an initial factor analysis, the following composite indicators were created and standardized:
Opening SessionCONCETPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Critical Openness: Why ‘Critical’
Therefore, by broadening the concept of ‘critical open-mindedness’ we relate it to the capacity of the subjects to mindedness’ we relate it to the capacity of the subjects to be: (1) socially inclusive in their relationships with marginalized groups and in their perception of social Self (like the way they define citizenship and extend civil rights to different groups); (2) tolerant towards others with different identities and backgrounds while avoiding any prejudgment on the bases of the other’s collective identity; (3) critical of stereotypical and ‘essentialist’ perceptions of other groups or other beliefs, faiths, cultures, or languages;
Dealing with Complexity in society 9Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 9
other groups or other beliefs, faiths, cultures, or languages; (4) mindful of serious social and ecological challenges that threaten not only themselves but also more vulnerable communities other than theirs; (5) sensitive to unfairness, injustice and social inequalities;
Opening SessionCONCETPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Critical Openness: Why ‘Critical’
(6) willing to protest and spend their resources to create a more ecologically secure and more just society for more ecologically secure and more just society for everyone; (7) commitment to democratic rights and to be aware of the necessity of the equal distribution of material or economic resources across social groups as a precondition for a meaningful democracy where everyone not only has the right but also the opportunity to autonomously take part in
Dealing with Complexity in society 10Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 10
opportunity to autonomously take part in decision/policy making processes; and finally (8) willing to have an inclusive notion of ‘people’ and to put the interests of the ‘people’ above the interests of social institutions like markets or governments.
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical OpenConstructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical OpenConstructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical OpenConstructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical Open----mindedness mindedness mindedness mindedness
“The World Values Survey (WVS) is a worldwide network of social scientists studying changing values and their impact on social and political life. The WVS in collaboration with EVS (European Values
Constructing a Synthetic Social Constructing a Synthetic Social Constructing a Synthetic Social Constructing a Synthetic Social Index for Critical OpenIndex for Critical OpenIndex for Critical OpenIndex for Critical Open----mindedness mindedness mindedness mindedness
political life. The WVS in collaboration with EVS (European Values Study) carried out representative national surveys in 97 societies containing almost 90 percent of the world's population.”
Australian Social Value Surveys in 2005 and 2012 conducted by the Australian National University.
In 2005: self completion, mailed, 1421 respondents (out of 3273 total eligible sample members). Response Rate: 43%
In 2012: Total of 5000 sample members, Completed surveys 1,477,
Dealing with Complexity in society 11Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 11
In 2012: Total of 5000 sample members, Completed surveys 1,477, 29.5% (1,286 hardcopy surveys and 191 online); Non response 3,184 63.7%
Both the questionnaire and data files can be downloaded from their archive.
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social IndexConstructing a Synthetic Social IndexConstructing a Synthetic Social IndexConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
Constructing Composite Dimensional Indicators of Critical OpennessConstructing Composite Dimensional Indicators of Critical OpennessConstructing Composite Dimensional Indicators of Critical OpennessConstructing Composite Dimensional Indicators of Critical Openness
First round: dimensional composite indicators: Social, Political, Cultural, Economic, EnvironmentalCultural, Economic, Environmental
Social: composed of statements that measure social trust, inclusiveness in social relations, anti-sexism, anti-orthodoxy, anti-faithism, non-essentialist worldviews,
Political: two dimensions: democratic consciousness and democratic commitment. Statements that measure perception of democracy and democratic values and perception of the
Dealing with Complexity in society 12Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 12
of democracy and democratic values and perception of the status quo.
Cultural: inclusiveness towards culturally and ethnically groups, inclusive definition of citizenship, appreciation of ethnic diversity, openness towards immigration, etc.
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social IndexConstructing a Synthetic Social IndexConstructing a Synthetic Social IndexConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
Constructing Dimensional Composite Indicators of Critical OpennessConstructing Dimensional Composite Indicators of Critical OpennessConstructing Dimensional Composite Indicators of Critical OpennessConstructing Dimensional Composite Indicators of Critical Openness
Economic: positions about economic equality, private vs. Public ownership of economy, responsibility of self/individuals vs. ownership of economy, responsibility of self/individuals vs. Government’s, competition, etc.
Environmental: caring about nature, willingness to give money for conservation, willingness to protest for an ecological cause, giving priority to ecology vs. Economy.
---------------------------------------
COI = synthesis of (Social, Political, Cultural, Economic, Ecological).
Dealing with Complexity in society 13Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 13
Ecological).
----------------------------------
Cognitive: statements of ‘general trust’, ‘anti-authoritarian views’, ‘tolerance and caring’, and ‘being innovative and creative’,
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
An Integrative Pragmatic Method of Composition,
1. Selection of indicators based on the 1. Selection of indicators based on the conceptual framework through an inter-subjective/dialogical and academically open-minded method, discussion of ideological backdrops;
2. Making adjustments for directions and the
Dealing with Complexity in society 14Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 14
2. Making adjustments for directions and the imputation of missing values through an inter-subjective process,
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
An Integrative Pragmatic Method of Composition,
3. Normalization through the calculation of S scores of sub-indicators: Sj = (xj – min)/(max – min), Sjof sub-indicators: Sj = (xj – min)/(max – min), Sjranges between 0 and 1. It avoids negative values. j = number of sub-indicators.
4. Checking the reliability of the scale (Cronbach's Cronbach's Cronbach's Cronbach's alpha)alpha)alpha)alpha) for each externally defined dimension against the reliability of components found through factor analysis.
5. Running Principle Component Analysis (PCA) of S scored sub-indicators to estimate the weights, Eigen
Dealing with Complexity in society 15Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 15
5. Running Principle Component Analysis (PCA) of S scored sub-indicators to estimate the weights, Eigen values above 1 (or above 0.9 when only one component arises and is less than 50% of total variation). Inter-subjective adjustment of the weights if necessary.
Content Validity of Cognitive Openness: factor analysis of elementary indicators and the compatibility of formative and reflective
Checking the content validity of CI
Dealing with Complexity in society 16
Dealing with Complexity in society
Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 16
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
An Integrative Pragmatic Method of Composition,
• To estimate the weights: Weights are the product of the [Rotated Component Matrix in absolute values] by the [Matrix of “% of variance explained by selected factors”]. [Rotated Component Matrix in absolute values] by the [Matrix of “% of variance explained by selected factors”]. (see T. Hlavsa 2010).
• Alternatively, Component/Factor variables can be used instead of original variables to compose the CI, while being weighted based on their associated % of variance. However, decision needs to be made as to what method should be finally adopted depending on the highest external validity of the CI resulted from each of the above methods.
Dealing with Complexity in society 17Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 17
the CI resulted from each of the above methods.• Sub-indicators in each dimensional CI with lower weight (due to limited variation) can be concaved. This needs to be decided after considering the consequences. (concaved Sj = Sj– 0.2 exp(-2.Sj)) then weight can be re-estimated.
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
An Integrative Pragmatic Method of Composition,
6. Dimensional CI = (∑ wj * sj)/∑wj7. Relative Penalization of cases depending on 7. Relative Penalization of cases depending on their variation from maximum value across sub-indicators (conditioned to the improvement of external validity)Penalty rate for case i: average of “variation or deviation” from maximum value across sub-indicators PRi=VM/(m * Max(VM)) (m is the
Dealing with Complexity in society 18Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 18
indicators PRi=VM/(m * Max(VM)) (m is the number of sub-indicators, Max(VM) is the maximum value of variable VM; VM is:
VM = ∑ |Sj – Max(Sj)| or ∑(Sj –Max(Sj))2
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
An Integrative Pragmatic Method of Composition
• CI-pen (CI after the penalization of cases)
• CI-peni = CIi – PRi
8.Compare the regression of CI and CI-pen on a number of factors which are logically or according to the literature are expected to predict the CI. Use an Automatic Linear Regression (by SPSS 19+) of CI vs CI-pen on the predictors compare the
Dealing with Complexity in society 19Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 19
of CI vs CI-pen on the predictors compare the results in terms of the predictability and the significant predictors. The CI with higher R square and/or combination of logically expected predictors should be finally chosen.
Opening SessionAn Integrative Pragmatic Method of Composition
9. Social Synthetic Index of Critical Openness, follow the same procedure from Step 3 onward. Dealing
Constructing a Synthetic Social Index
the same procedure from Step 3 onward. Dealing with dimensional CIs as new sub-indicators.
10. Final results will be COI composed of dimensional CIs, COIpen as the COI after the penalization of the cases, and COI
penas the composition of dimensional
CIpens11. Test the external validity of results through Regression or Path analysis. Compare and choose the most valid version of CI.
Dealing with Complexity in society 20Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 20
Regression or Path analysis. Compare and choose the most valid version of CI.
12. Disaggregation of COI through path analysis and the typology of respondents in terms of the relations between dimensions.
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Index
Penalization based on deviation from the mean across dimensions
• X1, X2 and X3 are three qualities of a product • X1, X2 and X3 are three qualities of a product and are equally important
Dealing with Complexity in society 21Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 21
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
Penalization based on deviation from the mean across dimensions
• X1, X2 and X3 are three qualities of a product • X1, X2 and X3 are three qualities of a product and are equally important
Dealing with Complexity in society 22Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 22
Opening SessionConstructing a Synthetic Social Index
Penalization based on deviation from the mean across dimensions
• X1, X2 and X3 are three qualities of a product • X1, X2 and X3 are three qualities of a product and are equally important
Dealing with Complexity in society 23Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 23
Xpen2=MEAN(X1, X2, X3) - (ABS(X1 - Max(X1, X2, X3)) + ABS(X2 - Max(X1, X2, X3)) + ABS(X3 - Max(X1, X2, X3))) / 8.Xpen4=Xmean - VaryMax2 ** 2/ (3 * 5.66)
VaryMax2=SQRT((X1 - Max) ** 2 + (X2- Max) ** 2 + (X3 - Max) ** 2) – standard deviation from max
Opening SessionTitle Section 1Title Section 2Title Section 3
Title Section 4
Penalization based on deviation from the mean across dimensions
Dealing with Complexity in society 24Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 24
Opening SessionValidation of CIs
External Validation through linear regression (before penalization)
Dealing with Complexity in society 25Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 25
Opening SessionValidation of a CI
External Validation through linear regression (after penalization)
Dealing with Complexity in society 26Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 26
Distribution of CIs
Critical Open-mindednessCognitive Open-mindedness
Dealing with Complexity in society 27
Distribution of CIs
Social Open-mindedness
Cultural Open-mindedness
Dealing with Complexity in society 28
Distribution of CIs
Economic Open-mindedness Environmental Open-mindednessEnvironmental Open-mindedness
Dealing with Complexity in society 29Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 29
Distribution of CIs
Political Open-mindedness
Dealing with Complexity in society 30Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 30
Comparing dimensions (means)
1
Social
Mean of the Dimensions of
COI
COI
0.6308
0.5553
0.5169
0.5803
0
0.5
CulturalEnvironmental
Dealing with Complexity in society 31
0.7338
PoliticalEconomic
Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 31
Comparing dimensions (means)
1
Trust
Dimensions of Cognitive
Openness
Cognitive
0.6247
0.5840.6529 0
0.5
Anti-authoritarianInnovative-Creative
Dealing with Complexity in society 32
0.8083
Tolerance-Care
Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 32
Opening SessionValidation of CI
External Validation – Automated Linear Regression of Cognitive Openness on predictors
Dealing with Complexity in society 33Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 33
Opening SessionValidation of CI
External Validation – Automated Regression of Critical Open-mindedness on its predictors includign Cognitive Openness as a CI
Dealing with Complexity in society 34Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 34
Opening SessionValidation of CI
External Validation – Automated Regression of Critical Openness on the Components of Cognitive Openness and other predictors
Dealing with Complexity in society 35Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 35
Opening SessionValidation of CI
External Validation – Automated Regression of Socail Openess on the predictors including the dimensions of Cognitive openness
Dealing with Complexity in society 36Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 36
Opening SessionValidation of CI
External Validation – Automated Linear Regression of Cultural Openness on its predictors includng the dimensions of Cognitive Opneness
Dealing with Complexity in society 37Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 37
Opening SessionValidation of CI
External Validation – Automated Linear Regression of Environmental Openness on its predictors includng the dimensions of Cognitive Opneness
Dealing with Complexity in society 38Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 38
Opening SessionValidation of CI
External Validation – Automated Linear Regression of Economic Openness on its predictors includng the dimensions of Cognitive Opneness
Dealing with Complexity in society 39Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 39
Opening SessionValidation of CI
External Validation – Automated Linear Regression of Political Openness on its predictors includng the dimensions of Cognitive Opneness
Dealing with Complexity in society 40Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 40
Opening SessionConclusion
Findings and Discussion
• Critical Open-mindedness as a Synthetic index is composed of five dimensional CIs (social, cultural, composed of five dimensional CIs (social, cultural, political, economic and environmental). The index appears to be robust and externally valid enough. The Australian society in 2005 can be described as a slightly open-minded society in all five dimensions (slightly above 0.5 out of 1), more in politics (0.73) and less in economy (0.51) and culture (0.55). Socio-Cognitively,
Dealing with Complexity in society 41Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 41
economy (0.51) and culture (0.55). Socio-Cognitively, the individuals also show levels of openness higher than 0.5 out of 1, with highest level of ‘tolerance and care’ (0.8) but lowest in terms of anti-authoritarian personality (0.58).
Opening SessionConclusion
Findings and Discussion
• Only 31 percent of variation in Cognitive Openness can be explained/related to socio-economic predictors can be explained/related to socio-economic predictors showing the relative independence of this indicator from socio-economic conditions. However, significant but small increases of Cognitive Openness are found to be associated with increases in age, ethnic background (more Western), education, confidence in humanitarian organizations, tendency towards the
Dealing with Complexity in society 42Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 42
humanitarian organizations, tendency towards the political Left, political activism and confidence in labour union, more cognitive nature of tasks at work, optimism, and cosmopolitan sense of belonging.
Opening SessionConclusion
Findings and Discussion
• According to our Automatic Linear Modeling, Critical Openness is more dependent on socio-economic factors than Cognitive openness does. However, it is determined by cognitive openness (as one of its most However, it is determined by cognitive openness (as one of its most important predictors). It is also significantly and positively associated with tendency towards political Left, cosmopolitan sense of belonging, confidence in environmental organizations, education level, confidence in humanitarian organizations, interest in politics, and more independence at work.
• Although Australians at the personal/cognitive level show higher levels of ‘tolerance and care’ and lower levels of anti-authoritarian views, they ironically demonstrate higher levels of political openness and lower levels of cultural and economic openness at the collective level. This indicates a
Dealing with Complexity in society 43Hosseini, S A & Saha, L J Dealing with Complexity in society 43
of cultural and economic openness at the collective level. This indicates a limitation in their ability to translate their personal qualities of openness to their societal attitudes, except when the individual is involved in political activism, receives higher levels of education, experience discrimination, and has a stronger cosmopolitan identity and confidence in humanitarian and/or environmental organizations.