Polish adaptation of the Actively Open-Minded Thinking (AOT) questionnaire: Pomiar otwartego i elastycznego myślenia (POEM)
Anna Błaszczak
Institute of Psychology, Maria-Curie Skłodowska University in Lublinhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0597-5117
Marta Klocek
Institute of Psychology, Maria-Curie Skłodowska University in Lublinhttps://orcid.org/0009-0007-4406-6844
Abstrakt
Aims
The aim of this research was to develop a Polish adaptation of the Actively Open-Minded Thinking (AOT) questionnaire. This questionnaire allows to assess the disposition to flexibly consider different problems from various perspectives, regardless of one’s initially favoured options, as well as the critical attitude in analysing information and forming opinions.
Methods
The research was conducted among two groups of adult participants. Validity of the AOT scale was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis, and correlation coefficient analyses between the scale’s results and the measures of need for cognition, need for closure or cognitive reflection. Internal consistency of the Polish adaptation of the AOT scale was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha measure.
Results
Polish adaptation of the AOT questionnaire (Pomiar otwartego i elastycznego myślenia; POEM) satisfied the established reliability and validity criteria. Based on the conducted analyses, the instrument was significantly shortened relative to the original version of the AOT scale, with a similar approach seen in past research exploring the optimal item set with highest attainable psychometric properties. Internal consistency indices were sufficiently high and, in line with the researchers’ predictions, the instrument correlated with other measures of corresponding cognitive constructs.
Conclusions
AOT is a dynamic variable, dependent upon the influence of training or experience. Polish adaptation of the scale measuring the phenomenon is an instrument with promising psychometric properties, worth further investigation. The POEM scale can be valuable in assessing open-minded thinking in educational settings, in research investigating the conditions facilitating social categorisation or radicalisation.
Słowa kluczowe:
actively open-minded thinking, flexible thinking, AOT, Polish adaptationBibliografia
Baron, J. (1993). Why Teach Thinking? ‒ An Essay. Target article with commentary. Applied Psychology, 42(3), 191‒214. Google Scholar
Baron, J. (2008). Thinking and deciding (4th ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131. Google Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Morris, K. J. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805–818. Google Scholar
Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. DOI: 10.1257/08953300577519673. Google Scholar
Haran, U., Ritov, I., & Mellers, B. A. (2013). The Role of Actively Open-Minded Thinking in Information Acquisition, Accuracy, and Calibration. Judgment and Decision Making, 8(3), 188‒201. Google Scholar
Janssen, E. M., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Heijltjes, A. E. G., Mainhard, T., van Peppen, L. M., & van Gog, T. (2020). Psychometric Properties of the Actively Open-Minded Thinking Scale. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 100659. Google Scholar
Jarymowicz, M. (red.) (2002). Poza egocentryczną perspektywą widzenia siebie i świata [Beyond the egocentric perspective of seeing yourself and the world]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Psychologii PAN. Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80(4), 237–251. DOI: 10.1037/h0034747. Google Scholar
Kokis, J. V., Macpherson, R., Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2002). Heuristic and analytic processing: Age trends and associations with cognitive ability and cognitive styles. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 83, 26‒52. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-0965(02)00121-2. Google Scholar
Kossowska, M. (2003). Różnice indywidualne w potrzebie poznawczego domknięcia [Individual differences in the need for cognitive closure]. Przegląd Psychologiczny [The Review of Psychology], 46(4), 355–374. Google Scholar
Kossowska, M. (2009). Nowe poznawcze wymiary osobowości a społeczne poznanie i działanie [New cognitive dimensions of personality versus social cognition and Action]. In M. Kofta & M. Kossowska (Eds.), Psychologia poznania społecznego: Nowe tendencje [The psychology of social cognition: New trends] (pp. 225–244). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. Google Scholar
Kossowska, M., Hanusz, K., & Trejtowicz, M. (2012). Różnice indywidualne w potrzebie poznawczego domknięcia [Individual differences in the need for cognitive closure]. Psychologia Społeczna [Social Psychology], 7(1), 89–99. Google Scholar
Lubiewska, K., & Głogowska, K. (2018). Zastosowanie analizy równoważności pomiarowej w badaniach psychologicznych [Application of measurement equivalence analysis in psychological research]. Polskie Forum Psychologiczne [Polish Psychological Forum], 23, 330‒356. Google Scholar
Matusz, P. J., Traczyk, J., & Gąsiorowska, A. (2011). Kwestionariusz Potrzeby Poznania – konstrukcja i weryfikacja empiryczna narzędzia mierzącego motywację poznawczą [Need for Cognition Questionnaire – construction and empirical validation of a tool measuring cognitive motivation]. Psychologia Społeczna [Social Psychology], 2(17), 113–128. Google Scholar
Metz, S. E., Baelen, R. N., & Yu, A. (2020). Actively open‐minded thinking in American adolescents. Review of Education, 8(3), 768‒799. Google Scholar
Paulhus, D. L., & Reid, D. B. (1991). Enhancement and denial in socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(2), 307‒317. Google Scholar
Rachev, N. R., Geiger, S. J., Vintr, J., Kirilova, D., Nabutovsky, A., & Nelsson, J. (2022). Actively open-minded thinking, bullshit receptivity, and susceptibility to framing: Evaluating the dual-process account in North America and Bulgaria. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 38(6), 440–451. DOI: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000685. Google Scholar
Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (Eds.). (1991). Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes. Academic Press. Google Scholar
Sá, W. C., Kelley, C. N., Ho, C., & Stanovich, K. E. (2005). Thinking about personal theories: Individual differences in the coordination of theory and evidence. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1149–1161. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2004.07.012. Google Scholar
Sá, W. C., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (1999). The domain specificity and generality of belief bias: Searching for a generalizable critical thinking skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 497–510. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.497. Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 342‒357. Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2007). Natural myside bias is independent of cognitive ability. Thinking & Reasoning, 13(3), 225‒247. Google Scholar
Svedholm-Häkkinen, A.M., & Lindeman, M. (2017). Actively open-minded thinking: Development of a shortened scale and disentangling attitudes towards knowledge and people. Thinking & Reasoning, 24, 21‒40. DOI: 10.1080/13546783.2017.1378723. Google Scholar
Szydłowski, P. (2015). Pomiar stylu analitycznego przetwarzania informacji. Wstępna weryfikacja narzędzi: Testu Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) i zadań Base-Rate Tasks (BRT) [Measuring analytical style of information processing. Pre-verification of tools: Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) and Base-Rate Tasks (BRT)]. Studia Psychologica, 15(2), 57–70. Google Scholar
Szydłowski, P. (2019). Style poznawcze a religijność [Cognitive styles and religiosity]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Liberi Libri. Google Scholar
Troldahl, V., & Powell, F. (1965). A short-form dogmatism scale for use in field studies. Social Forces, 44, 211‒215. Google Scholar
Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049‒1062. Google Scholar
Institute of Psychology, Maria-Curie Skłodowska University in Lublin
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0597-5117
Institute of Psychology, Maria-Curie Skłodowska University in Lublin
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4406-6844
Licencja
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
