每个人都有扯淡的时候:在移民话题中,扯淡频率、过度自信和自我偏见的关系

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
V. Čavojová, I. Brezina
{"title":"每个人都有扯淡的时候:在移民话题中,扯淡频率、过度自信和自我偏见的关系","authors":"V. Čavojová, I. Brezina","doi":"10.31577/SP.2021.02.818","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Current research on bullshit has shifted its focus from the recipient of bullshit to the producer of bullshit; this trend being reflected in the new Bullshitting frequency scale (Littrell et al., 2020) measuring persuasive and evasive bullshitting. The aim of our study was to validate the scale on the Slovak population and to examine the relationship between persuasive and evasive bullshitting behavior, overconfidence and myside bias in the context of the topic of migration. Six hundred and sixty-six Slovak adults (52.7% men, Mage = 41.84) participated in an online study. The two-factor structure of BFS was confirmed. The results showed that people high in persuasive bullshitting (“persuasive bullshitters”), after controlling for evasive bullshitting, felt they had more knowledge about migration, but they also showed more myside bias. Similarly, people high in evasive bullshitting (“evasive bullshitters”), after controlling for persuasive bullshitting, felt they had less knowledge about migration and tended to underestimate their knowledge. Contrary to our expectations, correlation between overconfidence and persuasive bullshitting disappeared when evasive bullshitting was controlled for, and it seems that negative the correlation was caused by evasive bullshitters being underconfident. Our results further expand the knowledge about cognitive characteristics of bullshitters and support the distinction between the two kinds of bullshitting behavior, which has implications for political debates as well.","PeriodicalId":45798,"journal":{"name":"Studia Psychologica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Everybody Bullshits Sometimes: Relationships of Bullshitting Frequency, Overconfidence and Myside Bias in the Topic of Migration\",\"authors\":\"V. Čavojová, I. Brezina\",\"doi\":\"10.31577/SP.2021.02.818\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Current research on bullshit has shifted its focus from the recipient of bullshit to the producer of bullshit; this trend being reflected in the new Bullshitting frequency scale (Littrell et al., 2020) measuring persuasive and evasive bullshitting. The aim of our study was to validate the scale on the Slovak population and to examine the relationship between persuasive and evasive bullshitting behavior, overconfidence and myside bias in the context of the topic of migration. Six hundred and sixty-six Slovak adults (52.7% men, Mage = 41.84) participated in an online study. The two-factor structure of BFS was confirmed. The results showed that people high in persuasive bullshitting (“persuasive bullshitters”), after controlling for evasive bullshitting, felt they had more knowledge about migration, but they also showed more myside bias. Similarly, people high in evasive bullshitting (“evasive bullshitters”), after controlling for persuasive bullshitting, felt they had less knowledge about migration and tended to underestimate their knowledge. Contrary to our expectations, correlation between overconfidence and persuasive bullshitting disappeared when evasive bullshitting was controlled for, and it seems that negative the correlation was caused by evasive bullshitters being underconfident. Our results further expand the knowledge about cognitive characteristics of bullshitters and support the distinction between the two kinds of bullshitting behavior, which has implications for political debates as well.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45798,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Psychologica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Psychologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31577/SP.2021.02.818\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Psychologica","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31577/SP.2021.02.818","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目前对屁话的研究已经从屁话的接受者转向了屁话的制造者;这一趋势反映在新的胡扯频率量表(Littrell et al., 2020)中,该量表测量了说服性和回避性的胡扯。我们研究的目的是验证斯洛伐克人口的规模,并检查在移民主题背景下说服和回避扯淡行为,过度自信和我的偏见之间的关系。666名斯洛伐克成年人(52.7%为男性,法师= 41.84)参与了一项在线研究。确定了BFS的双因子结构。结果显示,在控制了闪烁其词的胡扯之后,那些高说服力的人(“有说服力的胡扯者”)觉得他们对移民有更多的了解,但他们也表现出更多的自我偏见。同样,在控制了有说服力的胡扯之后,那些回避性胡扯的人(“逃避性胡扯者”)觉得他们对移民的了解更少,并且倾向于低估他们的知识。与我们的预期相反,当规避性的扯淡被控制后,过度自信与劝导性的扯淡之间的相关性消失了,似乎是由于规避性的扯淡不自信导致了负相关。我们的研究结果进一步扩展了关于扯淡者认知特征的知识,并支持两种扯淡行为之间的区别,这对政治辩论也有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Everybody Bullshits Sometimes: Relationships of Bullshitting Frequency, Overconfidence and Myside Bias in the Topic of Migration
Current research on bullshit has shifted its focus from the recipient of bullshit to the producer of bullshit; this trend being reflected in the new Bullshitting frequency scale (Littrell et al., 2020) measuring persuasive and evasive bullshitting. The aim of our study was to validate the scale on the Slovak population and to examine the relationship between persuasive and evasive bullshitting behavior, overconfidence and myside bias in the context of the topic of migration. Six hundred and sixty-six Slovak adults (52.7% men, Mage = 41.84) participated in an online study. The two-factor structure of BFS was confirmed. The results showed that people high in persuasive bullshitting (“persuasive bullshitters”), after controlling for evasive bullshitting, felt they had more knowledge about migration, but they also showed more myside bias. Similarly, people high in evasive bullshitting (“evasive bullshitters”), after controlling for persuasive bullshitting, felt they had less knowledge about migration and tended to underestimate their knowledge. Contrary to our expectations, correlation between overconfidence and persuasive bullshitting disappeared when evasive bullshitting was controlled for, and it seems that negative the correlation was caused by evasive bullshitters being underconfident. Our results further expand the knowledge about cognitive characteristics of bullshitters and support the distinction between the two kinds of bullshitting behavior, which has implications for political debates as well.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studia Psychologica
Studia Psychologica PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
21
审稿时长
43 weeks
期刊介绍: The international journal Studia Psychologica is published by the Institute of Experimental Psychology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovak Republic, since 1956. The journal publishes original articles in the area of psychology of cognitive processes in personality and social context. The journal aims at providing contributions to the understanding of cognitive processes which are used in the everyday functioning of human beings. This includes studies on the acquisition and use of knowledge about the world by human beings, the nature of such knowledge, and the relationship between knowledge, behavior and personality conceived as an agent in his/her environment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信