When saying that you are biased means that you are acurate? The moderating effect of cognitive structuring on relationship between metacognitive self and confirmation bias use
- 131 Downloads
The aim of our study was to answer two questions: 1. How accurate are the reports of people who assert they are biased? 2. Why do people who know they are biased tend to engage in more inappropriate behavior? A total of 340 undergraduate students participated in the study. They followed a special procedure measuring cognitive structuring, efficacy to fulfill personal need to achieve cognitive structuring, metacognitive self (i.e. self-awareness of biases), and the level of performed confirmation bias. The procedure was created for investigating confirmation bias concerning the perception of self versus others. The first question may be answered by the assertion that the more metacognitive self-awareness of biases a person possesses, the more confirmation bias they exhibit. The pattern of results concerning the second issue demonstrates that only efficacy to fulfill personal need for structure (EFEN) moderates the relationship between metacognitive self and confirmation bias. Thus, only low-EFEN individuals perceived the extent of their use of biases more accurately. We explain the effect in terms of cognitive processing style: an individual inclination for piecemeal processes.
KeywordsCognitive structuring Metacognition Confirmation bias Self versus other
The studies and preparation of this manuscript were sponsored by the Polish Centre for Science (NCN), grant number DEC-2012/07/B/HS6/02580.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures in studies involving human participants were performed in accordance with the ethical standards of institutional and national research committees, and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individuals participating in the study.
Conflict of Interest
Yoram Bar-Tal declares that he has no conflict of interest. Hanna Brycz declares that she has no conflict of interest. Barbara Dolinska declares that she has no conflict of interest. Dariusz Dolinski declares that he has no conflict of interest.
- Argyle, M. (1992). The social psychology of everyday life. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Bar-Tal, Y., & Kossowska, M. (2010). Efficacy at fulfilling the need for closure: The construct and its measurment. In J. P. Villanueva (Ed.), Personality traits: Classifications, effects and changes (pp. 47–64). New York: Nova Science Publisher.Google Scholar
- Brewer, M. B. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In T. Srull & R. Wyer (Eds.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 1–36). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Brycz, H. (2011). Perception accuracy of biases in self and in others. Psychology Research, 1, 203–215.Google Scholar
- Brycz, H., & Karasiewicz, K. (2011). Metacognition and self-regulation: the Metacognitive Self Scale. Acta Neuropsychologica, 9, 263–289.Google Scholar
- Brycz, H., Jurek, P., Pastwa-Wojciechowska, B., Peplińska, A., & Bidzan, M. (2014a). Self-attributions of meta-knowledge of the self in terms of Bernard Weiner’s theory. Przegląd Psychologiczny, 57, 347–367.Google Scholar
- Bunder, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30, 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02303.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chaiken, S., Libermen, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuation context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintendent Thoughts (pp. 212–252). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- Chaiken, S., Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chen, S. (1996). Beyond accuracy: Defense and impression motives in heuristic and systematic information processing. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 553–578). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Deutsch, M. (1960). The pathetic fallacy. An observer error in social perception. Journal of Personality, 28, 317–332.Google Scholar
- Fiske, S., & Pavelchak, M. A. (1986). Category – based versus piecemeal- based affective responses. Developments in schemata-triggered affect. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 167–203). New York: Guliford Press.Google Scholar
- Fletcher-Flinn, C., & Snelson, H. (1997). The relation between metalinguistic ability, social metacognition, and reading: A developmental study. New Zeland Journal of Psychology, 26, 20–28.Google Scholar
- Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Konarski, R., & Brycz, H. (2017). Construct and concurrent validity of the positive metacognitions and the positive meta-emotions questionnaire in the Polish population. Sage Open doi. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017705423.
- McCormick, C. B. (2003). Metacognition and learning. In W. Reynolds, M. Weiner, & G. E. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (pp. 79–102). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
- Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inferences – Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Szczepanik, J., & Brycz, H. (2017). Metacognitive self and hedonic tone: Behavioral and neural correlates. Poster presented at Self and Identity EASP General Meeting. Grenada, Spain.Google Scholar
- Takana, Y., & Kusumi, T. (2007). The role of metacognition in critical thinking proces. Japanease Psychological Review, 50, 256–269.Google Scholar
- Vohs, J. L., Lysaker, P. H., Francis, M. M., Hamm, J., Buck, K. D., Olesek, K., Outcalt, J., Dimaggio, G., Leonhardt, B., Liffick, E., Mehdiyoun, N., & Breier, A. (2014). Metacognition, social cognition, and symptoms in patients with first episode and prolonged psychoses. Schizophrenia Research, 153, 54–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2014.01.012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Weiner, B. (2014). An anecdotical history of motivation. Review of Psychology, 57, 311–335.Google Scholar