Situational Factors Influencing Receptivity to Bullshit

Q2 Psychology Social Psychological Bulletin Pub Date : 2019-11-13 DOI:10.32872/spb.v14i3.37393
Mitch Brown, Lucas A. Keefer, Shelby J. McGrew
{"title":"Situational Factors Influencing Receptivity to Bullshit","authors":"Mitch Brown, Lucas A. Keefer, Shelby J. McGrew","doi":"10.32872/spb.v14i3.37393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Individuals are motivated to maintain a sense of meaning, and enact cognitive processes to do so (e.g., perceiving structure in the environment). This motivation to find meaning may ultimately impact humans’ interpretation of \"bullshit\", statements intended to convey profundity without any meaning. Conversely, subtle cues threatening the meaningfulness of bullshit may elicit greater skepticism. Three studies tested situational factors predicted to heighten or diminish susceptibility to bullshit by changing motivations to seek meaning. We employed diverse methods including symbolic meaning threat (Study 1), social exclusion (Cyberball; Study 2), and manipulating cognitive fluency (Study 3). Taken together, the results indicate basic processes shaping the detection of meaning have implications for the appraisal of ambiguously insightful information.","PeriodicalId":32922,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychological Bulletin","volume":"138 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychological Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.v14i3.37393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Individuals are motivated to maintain a sense of meaning, and enact cognitive processes to do so (e.g., perceiving structure in the environment). This motivation to find meaning may ultimately impact humans’ interpretation of "bullshit", statements intended to convey profundity without any meaning. Conversely, subtle cues threatening the meaningfulness of bullshit may elicit greater skepticism. Three studies tested situational factors predicted to heighten or diminish susceptibility to bullshit by changing motivations to seek meaning. We employed diverse methods including symbolic meaning threat (Study 1), social exclusion (Cyberball; Study 2), and manipulating cognitive fluency (Study 3). Taken together, the results indicate basic processes shaping the detection of meaning have implications for the appraisal of ambiguously insightful information.
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
影响胡扯接受度的情境因素
个体被激励去维持一种意义感,并为此制定认知过程(例如,感知环境中的结构)。这种寻找意义的动机可能最终会影响人类对“胡扯”的理解,即那些旨在传达深度而没有任何意义的陈述。相反,微妙的暗示威胁到废话的意义可能会引起更大的怀疑。三项研究测试了情境因素,这些因素通过改变寻求意义的动机来提高或减少对胡扯的敏感性。我们采用了多种方法,包括象征性意义威胁(研究1)、社会排斥(Cyberball;研究2)和操纵认知流畅性(研究3)。总之,研究结果表明,形成意义检测的基本过程对评估模棱两可的深刻信息具有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Correction of Paulina Banaszkiewicz (2022). Biological sex and psychological gender differences in the experience and expression of romantic jealousy Correction of Nathan Vidal et al. (2023). Assessing the reliability of an infrared thermography protocol to assess cold-induced brown adipose tissue activation in French psychology students Willingness to use moral reframing: Support comes from perceived effectiveness, opposition comes from integrity concerns Feeling bad about feeling good? how avengers and observers evaluate the hedonic pleasure of taking revenge Anticipated and achieved individual mobility amongst Portuguese immigrants in Switzerland: Social identity adjustment and inter-minority relations
×
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:481959085
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