Openness/Intellect and Susceptibility to Pseudo-Profound Bullshit: A Replication and Extension

被引:28
作者
Bainbridge, Timothy F. [1 ]
Quinlan, Joshua A. [2 ]
Mar, Raymond A. [2 ]
Smillie, Luke D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Sch Psychol Sci, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[2] York Univ, Dept Psychol, N York, ON, Canada
关键词
Openness/Intellect; pseudo-profound bullshit; simplex; apophenia; PARANORMAL BELIEFS; BIG; 5; PERSONALITY; DOMAIN; INVENTORY; FACETS; RECEPTION; MODEL;
D O I
10.1002/per.2176
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
'Pseudo-profound bullshit' (PPBS) is a class of meaningless statements designed to appear profound. Profundity ratings for PPBS have been found to be negatively related to analytical thinking and positively related to epistemically suspect beliefs (e.g. belief in the paranormal). Conceptually similar traits within the Openness/Intellect (O/I) domain form a simplex, whereby traits are arranged along a single dimension from intelligence to apophenia (i.e. observing patterns or causal connections were none exist). Across two studies (total N = 297), we attempted to replicate the O/I simplex and determine how it relates to perceiving PPBS as profound. Participants completed questionnaires measuring traits from the O/I simplex and provided profundity ratings for PPBS. Profundity ratings of PPBS tended to correlate negatively with intelligence and positively with apophenia. The association with intelligence generally reflected a greater ability to discriminate the profound from the pseudo-profound, whereas the association with apophenia reflected poorer discrimination in Study 1, with less conclusive results in Study 2. In both studies, the O/I simplex was closely replicated. The results suggest a link between the O/I domain and perceiving PPBS as profound and tentatively support the theory that intelligence may protect against apophenia. (c) 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology
引用
收藏
页码:72 / 88
页数:17
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits
    Ackerman, PL
    Heggestad, ED
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1997, 121 (02) : 219 - 245
  • [2] [Anonymous], PSYCH PROCEDURES PSY
  • [3] Busing F. M. T. A., 1997, SoftStat '97. Advances in Statistical Software 6. 9th Conference on the Scientific Use of Statistical Software, P67
  • [4] The international cognitive ability resource: Development and initial validation of a public-domain measure
    Condon, David M.
    Revelle, William
    [J]. INTELLIGENCE, 2014, 43 : 52 - 64
  • [5] Costa P. T., 1992, Psychological Assessment
  • [6] Dalton C, 2016, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V11, P121
  • [7] Dennett D.C., 2014, INTUITION PUMPS OTHE
  • [8] DeYoung C.G., 2011, The Cambridge handbook of intelligence, P711, DOI [DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511977244.036, 10.1017/CBO9780511977244.036]
  • [9] DeYoung C. G., 2015, APA HDB PERSONALITY, V4, P369, DOI [DOI 10.1037/14343-017, https://doi.org/10.1037/14343-017]
  • [10] Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the big five
    DeYoung, Colin G.
    Quilty, Lena C.
    Peterson, Jordan B.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2007, 93 (05) : 880 - 896