Differences in psychologists’ cognitive traits are associated with scientific divides

IF 15.9 1区 心理学 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES Nature Human Behaviour Pub Date : 2025-04-17 DOI:10.1038/s41562-025-02153-1
Justin Sulik, Nakwon Rim, Elizabeth Pontikes, James Evans, Gary Lupyan
{"title":"Differences in psychologists’ cognitive traits are associated with scientific divides","authors":"Justin Sulik, Nakwon Rim, Elizabeth Pontikes, James Evans, Gary Lupyan","doi":"10.1038/s41562-025-02153-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scientific research is often characterized by schools of thought. We investigate whether these divisions are associated with differences in researchers’ cognitive traits such as tolerance for ambiguity. These differences may guide researchers to prefer different problems, tackle identical problems in different ways, and even reach different conclusions when studying the same problems in the same way. We surveyed 7,973 researchers in psychological sciences and investigated links between what they research, their stances on open questions in the field, and their cognitive traits and dispositions. Our results show that researchers’ stances on scientific questions are associated with what they research and with their cognitive traits. Further, these associations are detectable in their publication histories. These findings support the idea that divisions in scientific fields reflect differences in the researchers themselves, hinting that some divisions may be more difficult to bridge than suggested by a traditional view of data-driven scientific consensus. Scientific disagreements are not just a matter of using different methods or having conflicting data. Sulik et al. surveyed psychological scientists and found that disagreements are also associated with differences in researchers’ cognitive traits.","PeriodicalId":19074,"journal":{"name":"Nature Human Behaviour","volume":"9 6","pages":"1147-1161"},"PeriodicalIF":15.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.comhttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-025-02153-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Human Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-025-02153-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Scientific research is often characterized by schools of thought. We investigate whether these divisions are associated with differences in researchers’ cognitive traits such as tolerance for ambiguity. These differences may guide researchers to prefer different problems, tackle identical problems in different ways, and even reach different conclusions when studying the same problems in the same way. We surveyed 7,973 researchers in psychological sciences and investigated links between what they research, their stances on open questions in the field, and their cognitive traits and dispositions. Our results show that researchers’ stances on scientific questions are associated with what they research and with their cognitive traits. Further, these associations are detectable in their publication histories. These findings support the idea that divisions in scientific fields reflect differences in the researchers themselves, hinting that some divisions may be more difficult to bridge than suggested by a traditional view of data-driven scientific consensus. Scientific disagreements are not just a matter of using different methods or having conflicting data. Sulik et al. surveyed psychological scientists and found that disagreements are also associated with differences in researchers’ cognitive traits.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心理学家认知特征的差异与科学分歧有关
科学研究常常以思想流派为特征。我们调查这些分歧是否与研究者认知特征的差异有关,如对歧义的容忍度。这些差异可能会引导研究者对不同的问题产生偏好,用不同的方法解决相同的问题,甚至在用相同的方法研究相同的问题时得出不同的结论。我们调查了7,973名心理科学研究人员,并调查了他们的研究内容、他们对该领域开放性问题的立场以及他们的认知特征和性格之间的联系。我们的研究结果表明,研究人员对科学问题的立场与他们研究的内容和他们的认知特征有关。此外,这些关联在他们的出版历史中是可检测的。这些发现支持了这样一种观点,即科学领域的分歧反映了研究人员本身的差异,暗示一些分歧可能比数据驱动的科学共识的传统观点所暗示的更难弥合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nature Human Behaviour
Nature Human Behaviour Psychology-Social Psychology
CiteScore
36.80
自引率
1.00%
发文量
227
期刊介绍: Nature Human Behaviour is a journal that focuses on publishing research of outstanding significance into any aspect of human behavior.The research can cover various areas such as psychological, biological, and social bases of human behavior.It also includes the study of origins, development, and disorders related to human behavior.The primary aim of the journal is to increase the visibility of research in the field and enhance its societal reach and impact.
期刊最新文献
A large-scale comparison of divergent creativity in humans and large language models Indigenization and inclusion in Chinese academia Homophobia, economic precarity and the well-being of sexual and gender diverse people in a 153-country survey Shared sensitivity to data distribution during learning in humans and transformer networks Large-scale mega-analysis indicates that serial dependence deteriorates perceptual decision-making
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1