Abstract:Corrigendum: Reflective minds and open hearts: Cognitive style and personality predict religiosity and spiritual thinking in a community sample After online and print publication of the study of Browne, Pennycook, Goodwin, and McHenry (2014), an error was detected in the abstract of the article. In the second sentence of the abstract, 'higher' should be corrected to 'lower' so the sentence should read: 'In a relatively large (N = 1093), older community sample (M = 55.4 years), analytic cognitive style was asso… Show more
“…Conclusively, however, results do suggest that analytic thinking predicts vaccine endorsement in the US (see Figure 3), both singularly and holding constant demographic, political, and related psychological variables. This finding is not surprising: it is certainly in line with research linking a willingness and ability to think analytically with higher likelihood of acceptance of mainstream scientific ideas, such as the theory of evolution (see Gervais, 2015), while linking low willingness/ability to think analytically with belief in the paranormal, religious, and other nonscientific beliefs (Browne et al, 2014;Pennycook et al, 2012). That is,…”
Section: Implications: Cognitive Style Vaccine Endorsement and Affesupporting
confidence: 75%
“…Although this seems a simple exercise in equating 'like with like', the literature supports this conjecture at least at the level of predictor and outcome-type: an analytic cognitive style has been positively associated not just with higher education level, but with an overall higher level of acceptance of scientifically founded beliefs, and concurrent lower levels of belief in pseudoscience; supernatural phenomena; the paranormal, and belief in conspiracy theories (Aarnio & Lindeman, 2005;Browne, Pennycook, Goodwin, & McHenry, 2014;Genovese, 2005;Gervais & Norenzayan, 2012;Gervais, 2015;Pennycook, Cheyne, Seli, Koehler, & Fugelsang, 2012;Swami, Voracek, Stieger, Tran, & Furnham, 2014). For instance, greater endorsement of evolution, a foundational scientific principle, along with rejection of creationism, was recently found by Gervais (2015) to be predicted by higher levels of analytical thinking, while Gervais and Norenzayan 2012, along with (Browne et al, 2014) observed higher scores on measures of analytical thinking associated with lower religiosity and spirituality. Further, Aarnio and Lindeman (2005) found that analytic thinking mediated a negative relationships between education level and belief in the paranormal among Finnish university students, while increases in analytical thinking were found associated with lowered propensity to believe conspiracy theories in Swami et al 2014-which presumably equates to a greater acceptance of more mainline, scientifically founded beliefs (see Kata, 2012 -more on conspiracy theories will follow).…”
Section: Minimal Research On Analytic Thinking and Vaccine Endorsementmentioning
Though popular opinion in the US is favorable toward vaccination, a growing hesitancy to vaccinate children threatens rates of uptake and coverage. In response, researchers now study psychological factors thought to influence vaccine-decisions, as having this information might be useful in addressing vaccine hesitancy in the clinic and beyond. The present thesis reviews evidence from this body of work, and shares results of a new study on the influence of analytic and intuitive thinking styles upon endorsement of childhood vaccines. In a national sample (N = 543), analytic thinking predicted endorsement alone and in the presence of covariates in a regression model, while intuitive thinking's relation to endorsement in the model was statistically unclear, and so did not support or refute claims in the literature suggesting this association. Implications and limitations of results, as well as possible directions for future research are discussed in detail.
“…Conclusively, however, results do suggest that analytic thinking predicts vaccine endorsement in the US (see Figure 3), both singularly and holding constant demographic, political, and related psychological variables. This finding is not surprising: it is certainly in line with research linking a willingness and ability to think analytically with higher likelihood of acceptance of mainstream scientific ideas, such as the theory of evolution (see Gervais, 2015), while linking low willingness/ability to think analytically with belief in the paranormal, religious, and other nonscientific beliefs (Browne et al, 2014;Pennycook et al, 2012). That is,…”
Section: Implications: Cognitive Style Vaccine Endorsement and Affesupporting
confidence: 75%
“…Although this seems a simple exercise in equating 'like with like', the literature supports this conjecture at least at the level of predictor and outcome-type: an analytic cognitive style has been positively associated not just with higher education level, but with an overall higher level of acceptance of scientifically founded beliefs, and concurrent lower levels of belief in pseudoscience; supernatural phenomena; the paranormal, and belief in conspiracy theories (Aarnio & Lindeman, 2005;Browne, Pennycook, Goodwin, & McHenry, 2014;Genovese, 2005;Gervais & Norenzayan, 2012;Gervais, 2015;Pennycook, Cheyne, Seli, Koehler, & Fugelsang, 2012;Swami, Voracek, Stieger, Tran, & Furnham, 2014). For instance, greater endorsement of evolution, a foundational scientific principle, along with rejection of creationism, was recently found by Gervais (2015) to be predicted by higher levels of analytical thinking, while Gervais and Norenzayan 2012, along with (Browne et al, 2014) observed higher scores on measures of analytical thinking associated with lower religiosity and spirituality. Further, Aarnio and Lindeman (2005) found that analytic thinking mediated a negative relationships between education level and belief in the paranormal among Finnish university students, while increases in analytical thinking were found associated with lowered propensity to believe conspiracy theories in Swami et al 2014-which presumably equates to a greater acceptance of more mainline, scientifically founded beliefs (see Kata, 2012 -more on conspiracy theories will follow).…”
Section: Minimal Research On Analytic Thinking and Vaccine Endorsementmentioning
Though popular opinion in the US is favorable toward vaccination, a growing hesitancy to vaccinate children threatens rates of uptake and coverage. In response, researchers now study psychological factors thought to influence vaccine-decisions, as having this information might be useful in addressing vaccine hesitancy in the clinic and beyond. The present thesis reviews evidence from this body of work, and shares results of a new study on the influence of analytic and intuitive thinking styles upon endorsement of childhood vaccines. In a national sample (N = 543), analytic thinking predicted endorsement alone and in the presence of covariates in a regression model, while intuitive thinking's relation to endorsement in the model was statistically unclear, and so did not support or refute claims in the literature suggesting this association. Implications and limitations of results, as well as possible directions for future research are discussed in detail.
“…Desde esta perspectiva, distintos estudios han encontrado relaciones entre los constructos numinosos y el FFM en diferentes países como Australia (Browne, Pennycook, Goodwin, & McHenry, 2014), Austria (Schnell, 2012), Bélgica (Duriez & Soenens, 2006;Duriez, Soenens, & Beyers, 2004;Saroglou & Fiasse, 2003), Canadá (Browne et al, 2014;Taylor & MacDonald, 1999), España (Saroglou & Muñoz García, 2008), Eslovaquia (Gajdosova, Orosova, Janovska, & Benka, 2014;Halama, Martos, & Adamovová, 2010), Estados Unidos (Henningsgaard & Arnau, 2008;Rowatt & Kirkpatrick, 2002), Hungría (Halama et al, 2010), Irán (Aghababaei, 2013;Aguilar-Vafaie & Moghanloo, 2008;Mirsaleh, Rezai, Kivi, & Ghorbani, 2010;Salmanpour & Issazadegan, 2012), Inglaterra (Lewis, 1999), Noruega (Kaldestad, 1996) o Turquía (Dirilen-Gümüş, 2010), en diferentes religiones (Aghababaei, 2013;Aguilar-Vafaie & Moghanloo, 2008) y grupos etarios (Taylor & MacDonald, 1999).…”
Section: El Modelo De Los Cinco Factoresunclassified
“…Por su parte, si bien en numerosos estudios la relación entre la religiosidad y la apertura también puede parecer positiva, si se controla la espiritualidad, esta tiende a resultar negativa (Browne et al, 2014;McCullough & Willoughby, 2009;Saroglou, 2002).…”
Section: El Modelo De Los Cinco Factoresunclassified
A pesar de que el vínculo entre la espiritualidad y los rasgos de la personalidad fue intensamente indagado en la literatura académica en los últimos años –particularmente en el marco del modelo y la teoría de los cinco factores de la personalidad, no existen trabajos de revisión que permitan sintetizar el estado del arte respecto de esta relación. Por este motivo, el propósito del presente trabajo es revisar los estudios que se proponen indagar los constructos numinosos en atención a las diferencias individuales a partir de una revisión sistemática de la bibliografía en las bases de datos PsycInfo, ERIC, Pubmed, CAIRN, CLASE, Scielo, Dialnet, Lilacs y Redalyc. De acuerdo con la revisión, si bien existe una considerable disparidad de resultados, generalmente se han reportado asociaciones positivas entre estos constructos y la apertura, la responsabilidad, la extroversión, y la amabilidad, y negativas con el neuroiticismo. Se concluye que la discrepancia en los resultados respondería a la multiplicidad de técnicas de evaluación disímiles empleadas para relevar la espiritualidad y la religiosidad.
“…After online and print publication of the study of Browne, Pennycook, Goodwin, and McHenry (), an error was detected in the abstract of the article. In the second sentence of the abstract, ‘higher’ should be corrected to ‘lower’ so the sentence should read: ‘ In a relatively large (N = 1093), older community sample (M = 55.4 years), analytic cognitive style was associated with a lower probability of affiliating with a religious denomination and a lower probability of possessing strong religious faith ’.…”
Corrigendum: Reflective minds and open hearts: Cognitive style and personality predict religiosity and spiritual thinking in a community sampleAfter online and print publication of the study of Browne, Pennycook, Goodwin, and McHenry (2014), an error was detected in the abstract of the article. In the second sentence of the abstract, 'higher' should be corrected to 'lower' so the sentence should read:'In a relatively large (N = 1093), older community sample (M = 55.4 years), analytic cognitive style was associated with a lower probability of affiliating with a religious denomination and a lower probability of possessing strong religious faith'.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
