Factor Structure and Internal Consistency on a Reduced Version of the Revised Test of Need for Cognitive Closure

The need for cognitive closure is a construct postulated by Kruglanski that explains the motivational aspects which influence decision-making and its impact on the social environment. Initially, it was assessed through a unidimensional scale, later criticized for its poor satisfactory reliability and validity. Regarding these criticisms, Pierro and Kruglanski developed a new 14-item scale to measure two dimensions, which were not previously evaluated: urgency tendency and permanence tendency. Although the Revised Test of Need for Cognitive Closure is more economical in terms of assessment time, it would be optimal to develop a reduced test that can assess faster while maintaining validity and reliability. The present research aims to reduce the Revised Test of Need for Cognitive Closure scale to the Argentinian context. To this end, we worked on a non-experimental design, assessing this scale within a sample of 690 Argentinian university students (Women = 81.16%, Men = 18.84%), and proceeded to perform reliability, as well as confirmatory factor analysis, convergent validity, and factorial invariance analysis. The results indicate a bi-factorial structure of a Need for Cognitive Closure instrument with eight items and two dimensions: urgency tendency (α = 0.76) and permanence tendency (α = 0.64), suggesting good reliability in both of them. In addition, well convergent validity was checked with other validated instruments, and finally, the factor loadings were shown to be invariant. In conclusion, it was demonstrated the reliability and validity of reducing the Revised Test of Need for Cognitive Closure in our social environment.

One Recommender Fits All? An Exploration of User Satisfaction With Text-Based News Recommender Systems

Journalistic media increasingly address changing user behaviour online by implementing algorithmic recommendations on their pages. While social media extensively rely on user data for personalized recommendations, journalistic media may choose to aim to improve the user experience based on textual features such as thematic similarity. From a societal viewpoint, these recommendations should be as diverse as possible. Users, however, tend to prefer recommendations that enable “serendipity”—the perception of an item as a welcome surprise that strikes just the right balance between more similarly useful but still novel content. By conducting a representative online survey with n = 588 respondents, we investigate how users evaluate algorithmic news recommendations (recommendation satisfaction, as well as perceived novelty and unexpectedness) based on different similarity settings and how individual dispositions (news interest, civic information norm, need for cognitive closure, etc.) may affect these evaluations. The core piece of our survey is a self-programmed recommendation system that accesses a database of vectorized news articles. Respondents search for a personally relevant keyword and select a suitable article, after which another article is recommended automatically, at random, using one of three similarity settings. Our findings show that users prefer recommendations of the most similar articles, which are at the same time perceived as novel, but not necessarily unexpected. However, user evaluations will differ depending on personal characteristics such as formal education, the civic information norm, and the need for cognitive closure.

EXPRESS: Dispositional and Situational Predictors of Coping with Violated Achievement Expectations

Most students experience expectation violations during their academic career, such as unexpected failed tests. However, contradictory evidence does not always result in expectation change (accommodation). Expectations often persist through stronger efforts to fulfil the expectation (assimilation) or ignoring the discrepancy (immunization). Our study addresses possible situational and dispositional predictors that may be decisive influences on the use of the three coping strategies. We conducted an experimental study with n = 439 students who experienced an expectation violation in an achievement test. Dispositional coping tendencies, valence of expectation violation, and the interaction of valence and degree of expectation violation were found to predict situational coping. Furthermore, higher need for cognitive closure predicted stronger accommodation, and a large degree of expectation violation predicted stronger immunization. Thus, our study provides initial evidence on which situational and dispositional factors predict coping with expectation violations in an educational context. Expectation violation in a performance context mainly resulted in stronger efforts to protect positive achievement expectations.

When diversity leads to closed-mindedness: Cognitive factors explain the effects of perceived diversity

This paper makes a case for explaining diversity effects through cognitive factors as compared to demographic or other differences in backgrounds. We argue that studying perceived diversity in conjunction with diversity beliefs can explain positive and negative effects through a motivated opening or closing of the mind (Need for Cognitive Closure, NFCC). NFCC is the motivation to avoid uncertainty and ambiguity. In Study 1, we experimentally demonstrate that asking participants to think about differences among their coworkers increases their NFCC. Study 2 shows that greater uncertainty about social norms in the workplace is positively related to NFCC. Study 3 confirms the mediating role of NFCC in explaining divergent thinking attitudes in expatriates working in various multicultural cities around the world. Study 4 demonstrates that perceived diversity is positively associated with NFCC when people hold negative beliefs about diversity, whereas positive beliefs mitigate this effect. Lastly, Study 5 shows that the interaction between perceived diversity and diversity beliefs is further moderated by task type. Taken together, the present research highlights the importance of studying cognitive factors to explain diversity effects.