Two components of individual differences in actively open-minded thinking standards: myside bias and uncertainty aversion

References

• Ackerman, R., & Thompson, V. A. (2017). Meta-reasoning: Monitoring and control of thinking and reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(8), 607–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.05.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron, J. (1985). Rationality and intelligence. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baron, J. (1991). Beliefs about thinking. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 169–186). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Baron, J. (1993). Why teach thinking?—An essay. (Target article with commentary). Applied Psychology: An International Review, 42, 191–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1993.tb00731.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron, J. (1995). Myside bias in thinking about abortion. Thinking and Reasoning, 1, 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546789508256909
   Google Scholar
• Baron, J. (2009). Belief overkill in political judgments. Informal Logic, 29, 368–378. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v29i4.2904
   Google Scholar
• Baron, J. (2019). Actively open-minded thinking in politics. Cognition, 188, 8–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron, J. (2023). Thinking and deciding (5th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baron, J., & High, II, D. (2019). People who endorse actively open-minded thinking (AOT) are sensitive to cues indicating AOT of sources. Poster presented at the Society for Judgment and Decision Making meeting, Montréal, November, 2019. http://www.sjdm.org/presentations/2019-Poster-Baron-Jonathan-endorse-AOT-cues.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Baron, J., & Streicher, W. (2021). Generality of individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Poster presented at the Society for Judgment and Decision Making meeting, 2021 (virtual, held in February 2022). http://sjdm.org/presentations/2021-Poster-Baron-Jonathan-AOT-generality-thinking.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Baron, J., Isler, O., & Yilmaz, O. (2022). Actively open-minded thinking and the political effects of its absence. In Draft chapter for V. Ottati & C. Stern (Eds.), Divided: Open-mindedness and dogmatism in a polarized world. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Binnendyk, J., & Pennycook, P. (2023). Individual differences in overconfidence: A new measurement approach. Working paper. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4563382
   Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dweck, C. S. (2013). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilovich, T. (1991). How we know what isn’t so. Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gürçay-Morris, B., & Baron, J. (2019). The use of alternative reasons in probabilistic judgment. PsychArchives. https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12346.
   Google Scholar
• Haran, U., Ritov, I., & Mellers, B. A. (2013). The role of actively open-minded thinking in information acquisition, accuracy, and calibration. Judgment and Decision Making, 8, 188–201.
   Google Scholar
• Light, N., Fernbach, P. M., Rabb, N., Geana, M. V., & Sloman, S. A. (2022). Knowledge overconfidence is associated with anti-consensus views on controversial scientific issues. Science Advances, 8(29), eabo0038. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abo0038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, D. A., & Healy, P. J. (2008). The trouble with overconfidence. Psychological Review, 115(2), 502–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.502
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2020). On the belief that beliefs should change according to evidence: Implications for conspiratorial, moral, paranormal, political, religious, and science beliefs. Judgment and Decision Making, 15, 476–498. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500007439
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2015). What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cognitive Psychology, 80, 34–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.05.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perkins, D. (2019). Learning to reason: The influence of instruction, prompts and scaffolding, metacognitive knowledge, and general intelligence on informal reasoning about everyday social and political issues. Judgment and Decision Making, 14, 624–643. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500005350
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revelle, W. (2024). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. R package version 2.4.3. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych.
   Google Scholar
• Ruisch, B. C., & Stern, C. (2020). The confident conservative: Ideological differences in judgment and decision-making confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(3), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000898
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russo, J. E., Meloy, M. G., & Wilks, T. J. (2000). Predecisional distortion of information by auditors and salespersons. Management Science, 46(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.1.13.15127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shynkaruk, J. M., & Thompson, V. A. (2006). Confidence and accuracy in deductive reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 34(3), 619–632. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193584
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E. (2022). The bias that divides us: The science and politics of myside thinking. The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E., & Toplak, M. E. (2019). The need for intellectual diversity in psychological science: Our own studies of actively open-minded thinking as a case study. Cognition, 187, 156–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.03.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(2), 342–357. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, E. R., & Opel, R. B. (2000). Training to improve calibration and discrimination: The effects of performance and environmental feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83(2), 282–309. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2910
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stupple, E. J., Ball, L. J., & Ellis, D. (2013). Matching bias in syllogistic reasoning: Evidence for a dual-process account from response times and confidence ratings. Thinking & Reasoning, 19(1), 54–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2012.735622
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svedholm-Häkkinen, A. M., & Lindeman, M. (2017). Actively open-minded thinking: Development of a shortened scale and disentangling attitudes toward knowledge and people. Thinking and Reasoning, 24(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2017.1378723
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toplak, M. E., & Stanovidh, K. E. (2003). Associations between myside bias on an informal reasoning task and amount of post-secondary education. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17(7), 851–860. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.915
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, C. R., & Britt, M. A. (2008). The locus of the myside bias in written argumentation. Thinking & Reasoning, 14(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780701527674
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar