Says Who?: Epistemic Authority Effects in Social Judgment

Abstract

We are indebted to Carol Dweck, Mario Mikulincer and Tory Higgins for comments on an earlier draft. AbstractThis chapter features the concept of ascribed epistemic authority (Kruglanski, 1989) offered as a unique perspective on source effects in social judgment. In contrast to prior approaches that viewed the source of communication as external to the self, we assume that both the self and external sources may be assigned different degrees of epistemic authority in different domains, and that this determines how individuals process information, make decisions and undertake actions. The present framework traces the socio-developmental aspects of epistemic authority assignments, and considers individual differences in the distribution of authority assignments across sources. From this perspective, we claim a central role in human judgment to the information's source, and the assessment of its epistemic authority is seen to constitute an essential preliminary phase in individuals' approach to information.

El Estudio de las Preguntas Retóricas en el Cambio de Actitudes

“…Por otro lado, si la motivación y capacidad no está limitada a ser alta o baja, entonces una PR podría servir como una variable que aumente la probabilidad de elaborar profundamente la información, tal como se ha observado en investigaciones previas (Burnkrant & Howard, 1984). En condiciones de alta motivación y capacidad, una PR puede servir como un argumento más para la propuesta entregada (Kruglanski et al, 2005), llevar a corrección de los juicios previamente realizados (Wegener & Petty, 1995) o, si es entregada después de la generación de pensamientos, afectar la validez que las personas le otorgan a estos (Briñol & Petty, 2009). Hasta ahora se han estudiado explicaciones relativas al efecto de las PRs sobre la elaboración del pensamiento o sobre la validez que se le otorga a los mismos.…”

Dimensions Of Epistemic Authority Of University Professors

“…Authority of the pedagogue in the formal education processes is believed to be one of the most essential aspects of the issue of personal authority (Chiang, 2009; Kruglanski et al, 2005;Patchen, Crawford, 201;Pounder, 2008). Therefore, the concept of epistemic authority has become topical in research studies into authority.…”

“…Therefore, the concept of epistemic authority has become topical in research studies into authority. Epistemic authority is defined as a source of information having the decisive influence on the formation of knowledge, and its acknowledgement relates to the reasons for reliance on epistemic authority (Kruglanski, 1989;Kruglanski et al, 2005; Raviv, Bar-Tal, Raviv, Abin, 1993).…”

“…In social psychology, the concept of epistemic authority is researched in the context of the concept of social judgements in relation to the developing degree of epistemic dependence (Kruglanski et al, 2005;Rupp, 2011). Since epistemic authority is related to interaction in social context, a topical issue is one regarding experts and their knowledge, and a sign of epistemic authority is the degree to which claims for the role of an expert are accepted by another person (Kruglanski, 1989; Mugny, Chatard, Quiamzade, 2006, Quiamzade, Mugny, Chatard, 2009.…”

Epistemic authority of professors and researchers: differential perceptions by students from two cultural-educational systems

“…Epistemic authorities may also give information on domains that exceed their own discipline. In those cases, people may even believe that a source is knowledgeable in a wide range of topics: a generalized epistemic authority (Kruglanski et al 2005(Kruglanski et al , 2009). Empirical studies have demonstrated that students' age affects the extent to which they consider teachers generalized epistemic authorities (e.g., Raviv et al 1990a,b).…”