Psychological theory testing versus psychometric nay-saying: Comment on Neuberg et al.'s (1997) critique of the Need for Closure Scale.

Kruglanski, Arie W.; Atash, M. Nadir; DeGrada, Eraldo; Mannetti, Lucia; Pierro, Antonio; Webster, Donna M.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.1005

Cited by 111 publications

(148 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(142 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This issue has been fiercely debated (see, Kruglanski, De Grada, Mannetti, Atash, & Webster, 1997) but until recently, no conclusive answer on the nature of the Decisiveness scale was reached. In the meanwhile, some authors have argued that because of the non-significant relationship between Decisiveness and social attitudes, urgency strivings are not related to ideological variables (see, Kossowska & Van Hiel, 2003;Van Hiel et al, 2004).…”

Section: Is Decisiveness a Measure Of Urgency Strivings?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Need for Closure Relations with Authoritarianism, Conservative Beliefs and Racism: The impact of urgency and permanence tendencies

Roets¹,

Hiel

2006

PSYCHOL BELG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has shown that Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation mediate the relationship between need for closure (NFC) and conservative beliefs and racism. These results did not apply to the NFC facet scale Decisiveness. However, the Decisiveness scale has been reported to have a questionable validity, and the recent development of a new scale inspired a reassessment of these previous studies. The present results obtained in two Flemish undergraduate samples (N = 164 and 162) show that both the new Decisiveness scale and the other NFC facet scales correlate with conservatism and racism, and that both these relationships are mediated by social attitudes (i.e., RWA and SDO). In the discussion it is argued that not only permanence needs, but also the urgency need reflected in Decisiveness, are important in order to understand right-wing ideology.

show abstract

Section: Is Decisiveness a Measure Of Urgency Strivings?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Need for Closure Relations with Authoritarianism, Conservative Beliefs and Racism: The impact of urgency and permanence tendencies

Roets¹,

Hiel

2006

PSYCHOL BELG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Webster and Kruglanski (1994) found that the correlation between Need for Closure and Personal Need for Structure was weak (r = .24), whereas and Neuberg, West, Judice, and Thompson (1997) found that it was strong (r = .79). More recently, Kruglanski et al (1997) agreed that Personal Need for Structure and the Need for Closure are correlated more strongly than they first thought (correlations of .67 to .79), but noted that 'this leaves about 50% of the variance in the two scales unexplained by their commonality ' (p. 1007). The correlation between scores on these two scales, however, is about the same as the reliabilities of the scales (.77 to .84; Neuberg & Newsom, 1993;Webster & Kruglanski, 1994), suggesting that both scales may be assessing the same thing.…”

Section: Relations Among the Constructsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Group Stereotypes from Descriptions of Group Members: An Individual Difference Approach

Clow

Esses

2005

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examined the effects of Personal Need for Structure, Need for Closure, and Personal Fear of Invalidity on information processing during the development of stereotypes. In Study 1, participants read as many group member descriptions as they wanted before expressing group stereotypes. Participants higher in Personal Fear of Invalidity sought more information; they also developed more detailed stereotypes when they received more information, whereas participants lower in Personal Fear of Invalidity did not. There was a tendency for participants higher in Need for Structure & Closure to develop less accurate stereotypes. Finally, participants higher in Need for Structure & Closure or Personal Fear of Invalidity were less confident about their stereotypes when they received more information, whereas participants lower in Need for Structure & Closure or Personal Fear of Invalidity were more confident. In Study 2, participants were presented with two, four, or eight descriptions of group members before expressing stereotypes. Participants lower in Personal Fear of Invalidity developed more detailed stereotypes when they received more information, whereas participants higher in Personal Fear of Invalidity did not. When two or eight group member descriptions were presented (fewer or more than participants probably would have chosen themselves), participants higher in Personal Fear of Invalidity and lower in Need for Structure & Closure generated the most accurate stereotypes. Finally, participants higher in Need for Structure & Closure did not differ in stereotype confidence as a function of how much information they received, whereas participants lower in Need for Structure & Closure were more confident when they received more information. These results indicate that cognitive style plays a role in the development of group stereotypes.

show abstract

“…Need for Predictability is a facet of Need for Closure and, as the name of the construct suggests, refers to a preference for having secure knowledge that implies trans-situational consistency (Kruglanski, et al, 1997;Webster & Kruglanski, 1994). Even though in non-simulated settings it is impossible to know the true value of a latent variable with certainty, there are theoretical reasons to expect that Dutch-and French-speaking Belgians do not differ substantially from each other in terms of their Need for Predictability.…”

Section: Study 2: Empirical Application Of the Calibrated Sigma Methomentioning

confidence: 99%

The calibrated sigma method: An efficient remedy for between-group differences in response category use on Likert scales

Weijters

Baumgartner

Geuens

2016

International Journal of Research in Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors propose a procedure, labeled the calibrated sigma method, which is designed to correct for between-group differences in endorsement likelihood of response categories that are unrelated to the content of the items. The method is especially useful in cross-cultural research where group differences may reflect variation in scale usage rather than substantive differences. However, the procedure is also relevant in other situations, for example, when different data collection modes or different experimental manipulations affect respondents' perception of the meaning of the scale labels. The calibrated sigma method uses information derived from heterogeneous control items (calibration items) to reweight the responses to substantive items in a group-specific way. The advantages of the calibrated sigma method are that it avoids the arbitrariness in the assignment of particular numerical values to response categories; that it is compatible with the linear model, which is used by most marketing researchers; and that it does not require the use of complex nonlinear models involving the estimation of many additional measurement model parameters. The authors validate the calibrated sigma method on a simulated cross-linguistic data set pertaining to 12 different languages; an empirical data set collected from respondents of the same nationality but from two different language groups; and an experimental data set consisting of responses to two different response scale formats. The findings demonstrate that the proposed procedure controls for artefactual scale use differences across groups but does not eliminate substantive differences. It is particularly efficient for marketing research agencies, panel providers and other marketing researchers who analyze surveys involving multiple language groups, different scale formats, multiple modes of data collection, or different manipulations affecting the meaning of the response category labels.

show abstract

Psychological theory testing versus psychometric nay-saying: Comment on Neuberg et al.'s (1997) critique of the Need for Closure Scale.

Cited by 111 publications

References 49 publications

Need for Closure Relations with Authoritarianism, Conservative Beliefs and Racism: The impact of urgency and permanence tendencies

Need for Closure Relations with Authoritarianism, Conservative Beliefs and Racism: The impact of urgency and permanence tendencies

The Development of Group Stereotypes from Descriptions of Group Members: An Individual Difference Approach

The calibrated sigma method: An efficient remedy for between-group differences in response category use on Likert scales

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About