Competing hypotheses predict different cognitive-complexity patterns across ideological positions

Evidence

The primary goal of this study was to test alternative (although not mutually exclusive) hypotheses on the relation between cognitive style and ideology by assessing the integrative complexity of the parliamentarians in the Putnam sample. For instance, the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis leads us to expect that extremely conservative members of Parliament will be less integratively complex than their moderate conservative and socialist colleagues. The ideologue hypothesis leads us to expect that extreme conservatives and extreme socialists will be less integratively complex than their moderate conservative and moderate socialist colleagues. Finally, the value pluralism model leads us to expect that moderate socialists (who, according to Rokeach , place approximately equal importance on freedom and equality) will be more integratively complex than members of all three other ideological groups (who either value freedom over equality, like conservatives, or value equality over freedom, like extreme socialists). — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2293 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

When Allport noted signs of ideological malleability among dominants (as in his hypothetical conversation between Mr. X and Mr. Y, 1954/1979, pp.13–14), he misread them as indicating that intergroup attitudes were intrinsically irrational and driven by deep-seated animosity. Instead, the malleability of intergroup ideology reflects its rational, strategic nature, as dominant and subordinate group members adapt to changing political exigencies. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 681 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Distinct psychological theories make testable rival predictions about ideology and cognitive complexity — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2293; Integrative complexity measures cognitive structure, not ideological content or correctness — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2313; Integrative complexity correlates with left-of-center, tolerant, nonpartisan thinking — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2327 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Distinct psychological theories make testable rival predictions about ideology and cognitive complexity #corroborates (0.92) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2293
• Ideological malleability reflects strategic rationality rather than irrationality #complicates (0.71) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 681