Replacing words from another trial created deviant stimuli the prime could not clarify

Evidence

For the interview protocols it was suggested that the subject who is tolerant of ambiguity will make much use of limiting and qualifying language forms. The subject intolerant of ambiguity would take a more absolute tone. Of course the coders were free to consult the total protocol and so may simply have coded intolerance of ambiguity where there seemed to be intolerance of ambivalence or any of the other stigmata of authoritarianism. Consequently the interview results are not good evidence that prejudiced subjects were intolerant of ambiguity. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 571 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Direct demonstration resolves disputes and conveys meaning that words cannot — Freeman Tilden, Interpreting Our Heritage, 453; Priming can vary recognition of degraded speech while holding the stimulus fixed — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 4372; Coder contamination undermined the interview evidence for intolerance of ambiguity — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 571

Broader Connections

• Coder contamination undermined the interview evidence for intolerance of ambiguity #complicates (0.75) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 571