![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
The concept of contaminated mindware provides one conceptualization for measuring beliefs and attitudes about three domains that have evaluation-disabling properties in the context of reasoning: paranormal beliefs, conspiracy beliefs, and anti-science attitudes. We tested the underlying structure of individual differences in these three domains of contaminated mindware and their predictors in a sample of 321 Canadian undergraduate students. The predictors included cognitive ability, cognitive reflection, the dispositional tendency of actively open-minded thinking, and ontological confusions. A hierarchical model with three correlated general factors of paranormal, conspiracy, and anti-science beliefs and attitudes and four specific paranormal factors (i.e., psi, superstition, spiritualism, and precognition) was optimal. While all predictors were significantly correlated with the contaminated mindware domains, structural equation modeling results supported the unique effects of ontological confusions and actively open-minded thinking. The current results support the multidimensional nature of contaminated mindware domains and highlight some of its correlates and unique predictors. Providing a structure and theoretical framework for unwarranted beliefs and attitudes will be useful for measuring their potential impact on the processes of human reasoning.
Disclosure statement
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest
Correction Statement
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
Notes
1 The same three models were estimated using the full item list. Results were similar: The hierarchical model fit the data (CFI = .83, TLI = .82, RMSEA = .06, SRMR = .08) better than the three-factor model (CFI = .76, TLI = .75, RMSEA = .07, SRMR = .08) and one-factor model (CFI = .60, TLI = .57, RMSEA = .09, SRMR = .10).
2 To further explore the dimensional nature of individual differences in unwarranted beliefs and directly assess the reliability of a unitary unwarranted beliefs general scale, we used the reduced item set to estimate a model with a general unwarranted beliefs factor and three specific factors to account for residual correlations among the paranormal, conspiracy, and anti-science beliefs and attitudes items (in addition to specific factors for psi, precognition, spiritualism, and superstition). The model fit the data well (CFI = .94, TLI = .93, RMSEA = .05, SRMR = .05). The specific paranormal beliefs, conspiracy beliefs, and anti-science attitudes factors had omegas of .06, .76, and .62, whereas the unwarranted beliefs general factor had omega = .81. Notably, the general factor’s high omega is mainly due to the paranormal items having high standardized general factor loadings (ranging from .58 to .75) in contrast to the conspiracy and anti-science items having lower standardized general factor loadings (ranging from .12 to .42), meaning that the general unwarranted beliefs factor is essentially a paranormal factor (see Eid et al., Citation2017). Therefore, the model with the three correlated general factors of paranormal beliefs, conspiracy beliefs, and anti-science attitudes (in addition to the four specific paranormal factors) is preferable to a model with a general contaminated mindware factor and three specific factors of paranormal, conspiracy, and anti-science beliefs and attitudes (in addition to the four specific paranormal factors) because its factor structure is a better representation of the sources of reliable variance in the item sets.
3 We also calculated correlations using a revised 23-item AOT scale which excludes the belief items from the original scale (see Stanovich & Toplak, Citation2019), which yielded similar results. Specifically, the revised 23-item AOT scale was positively associated with cognitive ability (r = .31, p < .05), CRT (r = .20, p < .05), and OCS (r = .34, p < .05), and negatively correlated with beliefs in the paranormal (r = −.41, p < .05) and conspiracy (r = −.19, p <.05) and anti-science beliefs and attitudes (r = −.54, p < .05).
4 The structural equation model was also estimated using the 23-item AOT scale, excluding the 7 belief identification items (see Stanovich & Toplak, Citation2019 for further discussion of the issue), and had adequate fit to the data (CFI = .91, TLI = .90, RMSEA = .05, SRMR = .06). The 23-item AOT significantly predicted paranormal beliefs (B* = −.35, p <.001), anti-science attitudes (B* = −0.53, p < .001), and conspiracy beliefs beliefs (B* = −0.13, p < .05).
5 Based on a Reviewer’s recommendation, we also estimated a model examining the effect of cognitive ability, CRT, and AOT on OCS. The model fit the data well (CFI = 1.00, TLI = 1.00, RMSEA = 0.00, SRMR = 0.00). Cognitive ability (B* = .17, p = .004), CRT (B* = .17, p = .001), and AOT (B* = .28, p < .001) all significantly predicted OCS.