the relationship between the need for closure and deviant bias: an investigation of generality and...

7/28/2019 The relationship between the need for closure and deviant bias: An investigation of generality and process.

1/14

THE NEED FOR CLOSURE AND DEVIANT BIAS 1

This research was supported by the Australian Research Council's Discovery Projectfunding scheme (DP0556908). We are grateful to Jessica Beckerleg, Toni Lindsay, AbbyStokes, and Samantha Wilson for their assistance with data collection and coding.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mark Rubin at theSchool of Psychology, the University of Newcast le, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia. Tel:+61 (0)2 4921 6706. Fax: +61 (0)2 4921 6980. E-mail: [email protected]

Word Counts: Abstract: 209; Main text: 3,663; Footnotes: 0; References: 22 references (611words); Tables: 1 (179 words); Figures: 1 (38 words); Total for main text + tables + figures +references: 4,491.

This self-archived version is provided for scholarly purposes only. The correct reference for thisarticle is as follows:

Rubin, M., Paolini, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2011). The relationship between the need for closure anddeviant bias: An investigation of generality and process . International Journal of Psychology, 46, 206-213. doi: 10.1080/00207594.2010.537660
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.537660http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.537660http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.537660http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2010.537660


2/14


AbstractThe need for closure predicts an evaluative bias against people whose opinions or behaviorsdeviate from other members of their social groups (Doherty, K. T., 1998; Kruglanski, A. W.,& Webster, D. M., 1991; Schimel, J., et al., 1999). In the present study, we investigatedwhether the relationship between the need for closure and deviant bias generalized tononsocial stimuli, and we examined the process underlying this relationship. Sixty-oneundergraduate students completed measures of the need for closure, the need for structure,intolerance for ambiguity, and the ability to be decisive and achieve cognitive structure. Theythen rated their liking for letters of the Latin alphabet (A & B) whose locations were

consistent and inconsistent with relevant categories (A circle & B circle). Participantsliked category-inconsistent letters less than category-consistent letters. Measures related tothe need for structure and closed-mindedness correlated positively with this deviant bias,whereas measures related to the ability to be decisive and achieve cognitive structure did not.These results imply that the relationship between the need for closure and deviant bias is arelatively basic and pervasive effect that is not unique to social deviance and that is driven bythe need for structure and closed-mindedness. Implications for social and nonsocial stimuliare discussed.

KEYWORDS: need for closure; need for structure; stereotype-inconsistent; deviant bias


3/14


The Relationship Between the Need for Closure and Deviant Bias:An Investigation of Generality and Process

The need for closure represents individuals desire for a firm answer to a questionand an aversion toward ambiguity (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996, p. 264; see also Neuberg &

Newsom, 1993; Webster, & Kruglanski, 1994). Webster and Kruglanski (1994) developed a Need for Closure scale that consists of five subscales, including the preference for predictability, closed-mindedness, preference for order, discomfort with ambiguity, anddecisiveness. Notably, this scale measures an ability component as well as a need component,and this distinction between need and ability has caused serious debates about the structure

and validity of the scale (Kruglanski, Atash, DeGrada, Mannetti, Pierro, & Webster, 1997; Neuberg et al., 1997). However, the work of Mannetti, Pierro, Kruglanski, Taris, andBezinovic (2002) and Roets and Van Hiel (2007) have clarified this issue by demonstratingthat the ability items are restricted to the Decisiveness subscale of the Need for Closure scale.

The need for closure has been found to predict relatively negative evaluations of people whose opinions or behaviors deviate from other people in their social groups(Doherty, 1998; Kruglanski & Webster, 1991; Schimel et al., 1999, Study 5). In the presentresearch, we investigated whether the relationship between the need for closure and this

deviant bias generalized to nonsocial stimuli. We also examined the process underlying thisrelationship by investigating the extent to which the need for structure, closed-mindedness,and the ability to be decisive predicted deviant bias.

Previous ResearchIn previous research, Kruglanski and Webster (1991) and Doherty (1998) manipulated

the need for closure using time pressure or environmental noise and then measuredevaluations of an opinion deviant during group discussions. In a high time pressure condition,the deviant expressed his or her opinion five minutes before a decision deadline, resulting in a

f


4/14


The Present ResearchInvestigating the Generality of the Relationship Between the Need for Closure andDeviant Bias

The present research had two aims. First, we wanted to extend previous research inthis area by investigating whether the relationship between the need for closure and deviant

bias generalizes to nonsocial stimuli. Previous research has demonstrated that the need for structure a construct that is closely related to the need for closure, if not part of it(Neuberg, Judice, & West, 1997) predicts the degree of structuring of nonsocialinformation, including furniture and colors (Neuberg & Newsom, 1993, Study 3). In addition,

the need for structure predicts evaluations of apparently meaningless modern art (Landau,Greenberg, Solomon, Pyszczynski, & Martens, 2006). Furthermore, the need for closure isassumed to be a fundamental motivation that is not restricted to the social domain(Kruglanski, 2004). Consequently, we hypothesized that the need for closure would predict

biased evaluations of deviant targets when those targets were represented by nonsocialstimuli. Evidence in support of this hypothesis would imply that the relationship between theneed for closure and deviant bias is a relatively general, basic, and pervasive effect. Incontrast, a lack of support for this hypothesis would imply that there is something special

about social stimuli that is necessary for this relationship to occur.To test this hypothesis, we asked participants to evaluate letters of the Latin alphabet

(A & B) whose locations were consistent and inconsistent with relevant categories (Acircle & B circle ). We predicted that the need for closure would be positively related to anevaluative bias against letters that were located i n inconsistent categories (e.g., the letter Alocated in the B circle) .Investigating the Process Underlying the Relationship Between the Need for Closureand Deviant Bias


5/14


evaluative judgments of category-consistent and category-inconsistent stimuli. Consequently,we hypothesized that the ability to be decisive would not represent a significant explanatoryvariable in this paradigm. Instead, the need for structure and closed-mindedness should

predict deviant bias because category-inconsistent stimuli threaten the need for categoricalstructure and present contrasting dimensions as the basis for evaluation.

To test this second hypothesis, we used measures of the ability to be decisive, theneed for structure, and closed-mindedness to predict deviant bias. In particular, following

previous researchers (Bar-Tal, 1994; Neuberg et al., 1997; Roets & Van Hiel, 2007), we usedthe Decisiveness subscale of the Need for Closure scale and the Ability to Achieve Cognitive

Structure scale (Bar-Tal, 1994) to measure the ability to be decisive. Following Neuberg et al.(1997) and Webster and Kruglanski (1994), we measured the need for structure using thePreference for Predictability, Preference for Order, and Discomfort with Ambiguity subscalesof the Need for Closure scale (Webster & Kruglanski, 1994) as well as the Need for Cognitive Structure scale (Bar-Tal, 1994), the Personal Need for Structure scale (Neuberg &

Newsom, 1993), and the Intolerance for Ambiguity scale (Budner, 1962). Finally, wemeasured closed-mindedness using the Closed-Mindedness subscale of the Need for Closurescale. We predicted that neither of the ability to be decisive measures would predict deviant

bias and that only the need for structure and closed-mindedness measures would predict this bias.

MethodParticipants

Participants were 61 first-year psychology undergraduate students (8 men, 51 women,2 missing responses), aged 18 to 48 years ( M = 21.36), from an Australian university.Participants received course credit in exchange for their participation.Procedure

f


6/14


and category-inconsistent targets. So, for example, even if for some reason participants perceived the letter A to be more positive than the letter B, the fact that we representedcategory-consistent and category- inconsistent stimuli using A and B letters an equalnumber of times meant that valence differences between specific stimuli (A/B) could notaccount for evaluative differences between stimulus types (category-consistent/category-inconsistent). Note that this counterbalancing precluded the influence of letter-specific valence effects such as contrast effects (Schwarz & Bless, 1992; Sherif &Hovland, 1961) and the effects of category-based expectancy violations (e.g., Jussim,Coleman, & Lerch, 1987).

Perceived awareness of the research hypothesis. We considered the possibility that

implicit demand characteristics in our research design might cue participants to thehypothesis of a positive relationship between the need for closure and evaluations of category-inconsistent stimuli. In this case, participants might respond in a way that they

believe would confirm the perceived hypothesis in order to be good participants and notruin the research (Orne, 1962). In order to test this demand characteristics explanation, weasked participants to respond to two statements that measured their perceived awareness of the research hypothesis (PARH; Rubin, Paolini, & Crisp, 2010). The PARH statements were

(1) I wasnt sure what the researchers were trying to demonstrate in this research and (2) Iwas unclear about exactly what the researchers were aiming to prove in this research .Participants responded to each PARH statement using a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 =

strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree ). Participants also responded to three open-endedquestions that asked them to describe (a) what information they had heard about the researchfrom previous participants, (b) what the research was trying to show and how it was trying toshow it, and (c) what suspicions or doubts they had about the research.

Results


7/14


We subtracted evaluations of category-inconsistent letters from evaluations of category-consistent letters in order to form an index of deviant bias in which positive valuesrepresented a bias in favor of category-consistent letters and against category-inconsistentletters. As shown in Table 1, this index of deviant bias had significant, medium-sized,

positive correlations with all of the psychometric scales ( r s ranged from .30 to .42) apart fromthe Decisiveness subscale, r (59) = .09, p = .522, and the Ability to Achieve CognitiveStructure subscale, r (59) = .07, p = .590.

We also conducted a series of multiple regressions in which we included measures of the ability to be decisive, the need for structure, and closed-mindedness as simultaneous

predictors of the deviant bias. The Closed-Mindedness and Preference for Order subscalesand the Need for Structure scale emerged as significant predictors in these analyses.

To investigate the potential influence of demand characteristics, we examined the datafrom the two PARH items. These items had acceptable internal consistency ( = .83), and sowe reversed-scored them and computed their average in order to produce a PARH index inwhich the higher the score, the more participants believed that they were aware of theresearch hypothesis. A one sample t test showed that partic ipants mean PA RH score wassignific antly lower than the scales midpoint of 4.00 ( M = 3.12, SD = 1.42), t (58) = -4.75, p

the relationship between the need for closure and deviant bias: an investigation of generality and...

Documents