弯曲极端:通过矛盾的引导问题干预提高认知灵活性

IF 1.2 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Social Cognition Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.225
Nadine Knab, Kevin Winter, M. Steffens
{"title":"弯曲极端:通过矛盾的引导问题干预提高认知灵活性","authors":"Nadine Knab, Kevin Winter, M. Steffens","doi":"10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the increase in numbers of refugees worldwide, the acceptance of refugees in host countries is a highly contested topic. Negative attitudes towards refugees pose a challenge to both integration efforts and social cohesion. So-called paradoxical interventions help mitigating such extreme attitudes, but little is known about the cognitive processes elicited by these interventions. This research investigated whether a paradoxical leading-questions intervention targeting anti-refugee attitudes increases cognitive flexibility, especially among those with anti-refugee attitudes. Results of two preregistered experiments with general-population samples (N= 306) provide evidence that participants with anti-refugee attitudes showed higher cognitive flexibility in the paradoxical condition compared to control conditions. Thereby, this research proposes a cognitive foundation for the benefits of paradoxical interventions in intergroup contexts and suggests novel indications as to why these interventions are effective. We discuss the potential of paradoxical interventions for other important socially contested contexts, such as vaccination and climate change.","PeriodicalId":48050,"journal":{"name":"Social Cognition","volume":"39 1","pages":"225-242"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Flexing the Extremes: Increasing Cognitive Flexibility With a Paradoxical Leading Questions Intervention\",\"authors\":\"Nadine Knab, Kevin Winter, M. Steffens\",\"doi\":\"10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.225\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since the increase in numbers of refugees worldwide, the acceptance of refugees in host countries is a highly contested topic. Negative attitudes towards refugees pose a challenge to both integration efforts and social cohesion. So-called paradoxical interventions help mitigating such extreme attitudes, but little is known about the cognitive processes elicited by these interventions. This research investigated whether a paradoxical leading-questions intervention targeting anti-refugee attitudes increases cognitive flexibility, especially among those with anti-refugee attitudes. Results of two preregistered experiments with general-population samples (N= 306) provide evidence that participants with anti-refugee attitudes showed higher cognitive flexibility in the paradoxical condition compared to control conditions. Thereby, this research proposes a cognitive foundation for the benefits of paradoxical interventions in intergroup contexts and suggests novel indications as to why these interventions are effective. We discuss the potential of paradoxical interventions for other important socially contested contexts, such as vaccination and climate change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Cognition\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"225-242\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.225\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.225","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

由于世界范围内难民人数的增加,东道国接受难民是一个极具争议的话题。对难民的消极态度对融合努力和社会凝聚力都构成挑战。所谓的矛盾干预有助于减轻这种极端态度,但对这些干预引发的认知过程知之甚少。本研究调查了针对反难民态度的矛盾引导问题干预是否会增加认知灵活性,特别是在那些有反难民态度的人中。两项针对一般人群样本(N= 306)的预注册实验结果表明,与对照条件相比,持反难民态度的参与者在矛盾条件下表现出更高的认知灵活性。因此,本研究提出了在群体间环境中悖论干预的益处的认知基础,并提出了为什么这些干预有效的新迹象。我们讨论了在其他重要的社会争议背景下,如疫苗接种和气候变化,矛盾干预的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Flexing the Extremes: Increasing Cognitive Flexibility With a Paradoxical Leading Questions Intervention
Since the increase in numbers of refugees worldwide, the acceptance of refugees in host countries is a highly contested topic. Negative attitudes towards refugees pose a challenge to both integration efforts and social cohesion. So-called paradoxical interventions help mitigating such extreme attitudes, but little is known about the cognitive processes elicited by these interventions. This research investigated whether a paradoxical leading-questions intervention targeting anti-refugee attitudes increases cognitive flexibility, especially among those with anti-refugee attitudes. Results of two preregistered experiments with general-population samples (N= 306) provide evidence that participants with anti-refugee attitudes showed higher cognitive flexibility in the paradoxical condition compared to control conditions. Thereby, this research proposes a cognitive foundation for the benefits of paradoxical interventions in intergroup contexts and suggests novel indications as to why these interventions are effective. We discuss the potential of paradoxical interventions for other important socially contested contexts, such as vaccination and climate change.
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
Social Cognition
Social Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: An excellent resource for researchers as well as students, Social Cognition features reports on empirical research, self-perception, self-concept, social neuroscience, person-memory integration, social schemata, the development of social cognition, and the role of affect in memory and perception. Three broad concerns define the scope of the journal: - The processes underlying the perception, memory, and judgment of social stimuli - The effects of social, cultural, and affective factors on the processing of information The behavioral and interpersonal consequences of cognitive processes.
期刊最新文献
Facial Stereotypes of Competence (Not Trustworthiness or Dominance) Most Resemble Facial Stereotypes of Group Membership Author Index to Volume 41 Gendered Perceptions of East and South Asian Men Deformative Experience: Explaining the Effects of Adversity on Moral Evaluation Within-Person Versus Between-Person: Social Connectedness, Target Roles, and Cultural Backgrounds Contribute to Perceived Social Obligations
×
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