東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Individual differences in processes ...

Polstra, Mary Diana.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Individual differences in processes of motivated reasoning: Goals, prior beliefs, and the collection and evaluation of evidence.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Individual differences in processes of motivated reasoning: Goals, prior beliefs, and the collection and evaluation of evidence./
Author:	Polstra, Mary Diana.
Description:	83 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-08, Section: B, page: 4330.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International65-08B.
Subject:	Psychology, Personality. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3141973
ISBN:	0496890212

Individual differences in processes of motivated reasoning: Goals, prior beliefs, and the collection and evaluation of evidence.
Polstra, Mary Diana.

Individual differences in processes of motivated reasoning: Goals, prior beliefs, and the collection and evaluation of evidence. - 83 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-08, Section: B, page: 4330.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Riverside, 2004.

Motivated reasoning refers to decision and inference processes in which "hot" aspects of cognition are involved, including goals, motivation, and affect. The present study investigated three aspects of motivated reasoning: (1) the nature of dispositional tendencies toward accuracy or maintenance of prior beliefs, (2) the consistency of dispositional tendencies across stages of the reasoning process, and (3) the role of affect in motivated reasoning.

ISBN: 0496890212Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017585
Psychology, Personality.

Individual differences in processes of motivated reasoning: Goals, prior beliefs, and the collection and evaluation of evidence.
LDR:03505nmm 2200313 4500 001 1846185
005 20051117110100.5
008 130614s2004 eng d
020 $a 0496890212
035 $a (UnM)AAI3141973
035 $a AAI3141973
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Polstra, Mary Diana. $3 1934314
245 1 0 $a Individual differences in processes of motivated reasoning: Goals, prior beliefs, and the collection and evaluation of evidence.
300 $a 83 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-08, Section: B, page: 4330.
500 $a Chair: Carolyn B. Murray.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Riverside, 2004.
520 $a Motivated reasoning refers to decision and inference processes in which "hot" aspects of cognition are involved, including goals, motivation, and affect. The present study investigated three aspects of motivated reasoning: (1) the nature of dispositional tendencies toward accuracy or maintenance of prior beliefs, (2) the consistency of dispositional tendencies across stages of the reasoning process, and (3) the role of affect in motivated reasoning.
520 $a First, correlational analyses indicated that an accuracy orientation in reasoning style is marked by flexible thinking, negative affect, low self-esteem, and a separation between one's beliefs and one's self-concept. In contrast, prior belief bias was associated with a lack of accuracy motivation, a lack of flexible thinking, and a heavy investment of one's self in one's beliefs. The strength of the relationships between the proposed reasoning styles and other known, stable personality characteristics was interpreted as evidence of the dispositional nature of these reasoning styles.
520 $a Second, consistency of reasoning styles across stages of evaluation and collection of evidence was investigated. Specifically, correlations between the tendency to evaluate argument quality in either an accurate or biased manner and the choice to collect self-relevant information were assessed. Self-relevant feedback was offered from both peers and experts regarding both high (i.e., open-mindedness and intelligence) and low (i.e., interpersonal skills and test-taking skills) self-relevance characteristics. Overall, reasoning styles were not reliably correlated with the choice to collect self-relevant information; however, the relationship between accuracy orientation and collecting expert feedback was in the predicted direction. Prior belief bias was reliably correlated with valuing both high self-relevance and peer feedback.
520 $a Third, hierarchical regression analyses were performed in order to investigate the role of affect in collecting and valuing self-relevant information. Results indicated that the relatively stable, affect-laden variables of self-esteem and depression were predictive of valuing feedback, while more transient affective states, namely positive and negative affect, were predictive of collecting feedback. Results supported the hypothesis that measures of affect should be included in the prediction of outcomes related to the decision-making process. Results were considered in terms of a theoretical model of self-regulation.
590 $a School code: 0032.
650 4 $a Psychology, Personality. $3 1017585
650 4 $a Psychology, Social. $3 529430
690 $a 0625
690 $a 0451
710 2 0 $a University of California, Riverside. $3 791122
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 65-08B.
790 1 0 $a Murray, Carolyn B., $e advisor
790 $a 0032
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2004
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3141973