INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2004, 39 (4), 245253

Need for cognitive closure and politics: Voting, political attitudes and attributional style
Antonio Chirumbolo, Alessandra Areni, and Gilda Sensales University of Rome La Sapienza, Italy

his paper examines the impact of dispositional Need for Cognitive Closure (NFC) on different political attitudes and on the person blame and the system blame dimensions. Two hundred and thirty-four psychology students completed a questionnaire containing the Italian version of the Need for Closure scale, a measure of political and ideological attitudes, a measure of the person-system blame dimensions, and a measure of past voting. Results showed that high NFC individuals (vs. low NFCs) reported having voted for a rightwing party and holding more conservative attitudes. High NFCs (vs. low NFCs) turned out to have stronger anti-immigrant attitudes, to be more nationalistic, to prefer an autocratic leadership and a centralized form of political power. High NFCs also value religiosity more highly than low NFCs. High NFCs (vs. low NFCs) scored lower on pluralism and multiculturalism. Furthermore, high NFCs (vs. low NFCs) revealed a tendency to blame individuals for social problems, but no signicant difference was found with regard to the system blame dimension. Results are discussed in the light of the motivated social cognition approach (Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003).

ette etude examine limpact du besoin dispositionnel pour la fermeture cognitive (BFC) sur differentes attitudes politiques et sur les dimensions de responsabilite personnelle et de responsabilite du systeme. ` Deux cent trente-quatre etudiants en psychologie ont complete un questionnaire comprenant la version italienne de lechelle de besoin de fermeture, une mesure des attitudes politiques et ideologiques, une mesure des dimensions de responsabilite personnelle ou du systeme et une mesure de vote passe. Les resultats ont montre ` que les individus ayant un BFC eleve (versus un faible BFC) ont rapporte avoir vote pour un parti de droite et avoir entretenu des attitudes davantage conservatrices. Les individus ayant un BFC eleve (versus un faible BFC) saveraient avoir de plus fortes attitudes anti-immigrantes, etre plus nationalistes, preferer le leadership autocratique et une forme de pouvoir politique centralise. Les individus ayant un BFC eleve evaluaient egalement plus fortement la religiosite comparativement a ceux possedant un faible BFC. Les individus ayant ` un BFC eleve (versus un faible BFC) ont obtenu des scores plus faibles concernant le pluralisme et le multiculturalisme. De plus, ils ont revele une plus grande tendance a blamer les individus pour les problemes ` ` sociaux, mais aucune difference signicative ne fut trouvee en regard de la dimension de responsabilite du systeme. Les resultats sont discutes a la lumiere de lapproche de cognition sociale motivee (Jost, Glaser, ` ` ` Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003). l presente trabajo examina el impacto de la necesidad disposicional de cierre cognitivo (NCC) sobre diversas actitudes polticas y sobre las dimensiones de responsabilidad personal o responsabilidad del sistema. Doscientos treinta y cuatro estudiantes de psicologa contestaron un cuestionario que contena la version italiana de la Escala de Necesidad de Cierre, una medida de actitudes polticas e ideologicas, una medida de las dimensiones de responsabilidad personal o del sistema, y una medida de su conducta de votar pasada. Los resultados mostraron que los individuos con una elevada NCC (en comparacion con los de baja NCC) referan haber votado por un partido de derecha y mantener actitudes mas conservadoras. Los individuos con una elevada NCC (en comparacion con los de baja NCC) mostraron actitudes mas fuertes contra la inmigracion, resultaron ser mas nacionalistas, preferir un liderazgo autocratico y una forma de poder poltico centralizada. Estos mismos individuos tambien valoran mas la religiosidad y calicaron mas bajo en pluralismo y multiculturalismo. Es mas, aquellos con mas elevada NCC (en comparacion con los de baja NCC) revelaron una tendencia a responsabilizar a individuos por los problemas sociales, pero no se encontro diferencias

Correspondence should be addressed to Antonio Chirumbolo, Department of Social and Developmental Psychology, University of Rome La Sapienza, Via dei Marsi 78, 00185 Rome, Italy (E-mail: chirumbolo@uniroma1.it).
#

2004 International Union of Psychological Science DOI: 10.1080/00207590444000005

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/00207594.html

246

CHIRUMBOLO, ARENI, SENSALES

importantes respecto a la dimension de responsabilidad del sistema. Los resultados se discuten a la luz del enfoque de la cognicion social motivada (Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003).

INTRODUCTION The knowledge construction process is pervasive in almost every domain of human behaviour that implies taking decisions, formulating a judgment, or forming an impression. Cognition is central to all processes underlying social behaviour and the study of individual differences in cognitive style and in how people think has received a great deal of attention in social psychology (Suedfeld & Tetlock, 2001). Within the perspective of lay epistemology (Kruglanski, 1989) and motivated social cognition (Kruglanski, 1996a), need for cognitive closure was dened as a desire for a stable, solid knowledge in order to avoid uncertainty, and as a desire for a rm answer to a question and an aversion toward ambiguity (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; p. 264). The antecedents of the epistemic motivation towards a nonspecic closure can be found in circumstances that highlight the perceived benets and reduce the perceived costs of closure, such as time pressure, environmental noise, mental fatigue, boredom, or the dullness of a particular cognitive task. By contrast, the need to avoid closure may be instilled in conditions where the costs of closure and the benets of a lack of closure are highlighted (i.e. accountability, fear of invalidity, evaluation apprehension). Along with that, need for closure may also represent a stable individual disposition, as some individuals may display a systematic proclivity to value closure positively while, on the other hand, others may tend to avoid closure and prefer openness (Webster & Kruglanski, 1994). These individual differences may stem from a variety of factors such as cultural and societal norms, socialization practices, or social learning processes, where condence in ones own opinions and judgments, order, and clarity are appreciated and rewarded (Webster & Kruglanski, 1998). Consequences of need for closure are to be found in urgency and permanency tendencies. Urgency refers to the tendency to seize on early cues, while permanency reects the tendency to freeze on existing knowledge to preserve past and future cognition. These two tendencies affect a wide range of psychosocial phenomena mediated by information processing, both at the cognitive and at the social levels (for a review see Kruglanski, 1996b; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Webster & Kruglanski, 1998). In fact, empirical

research has demonstrated that urgency and permanency tendencies affect the extent of information processing (Mayseless & Kruglanski, 1987; Webster, Richter, & Kruglanski, 1996), persuasion processes (Kruglanski, Webster, & Klem, 1993), group processes (De Grada, Kruglanski, Mannetti, & Pierro, 1999; Pierro, Mannetti, De Grada, Livi, & Kruglanski, 2003), stereotyping (Dijksterhuis, Van Kippenberg, Kruglanski, & Schaper, 1996), primacy effect in impression formation (Freund, Kruglanski, & Schpitzajzen, 1985; Heaton & Kruglanski, 1991; Kruglanski & Freund, 1983; Webster, 1993), rejection of opinion deviates (Kruglanski & Webster, 1991), and overattribution bias (Webster, 1993). Need for closure and political ideology The way in which individuals generate and test hypotheses about the surrounding world also comes across as being of primary concern for political cognition and political attitudes. In recent years, research has also begun investigating the relationship between epistemic motivation and political attitudes, hypothesizing a relatively unexplored connection between individual motives for acquiring epistemological certainty and the content of particular ideologies (Jost, Kruglanski, & Simon, 1999; p. 98). In accordance with the theory, a relationship between epistemic motivation and manifestations of political conservatism was hypothesized (Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003). Conservatism entails a preference for safe, traditional, and conventional forms of political institutions and behaviours (Wilson, 1973). It is therefore reasonable to suppose that the chronic and temporary activation of cognitive-motivational needs associated with the preservation of what is common and predictable, and the rejection of the unusual and diverse, is also to be associated with attitudes of political conservatism and systemjustifying beliefs (Jost et al., 1999). In this perspective, Kemmelmeier (1997) found, in a German sample, that dispositional need for closure was higher in people who voted for a right-wing party and that it was positively related to conservatism. A series of experiments with American samples showed that need for closure was related to conservatism, intolerance, and several other system-justifying beliefs (Jost et al., 1999). Another study, conducted with an Italian

NEED FOR CLOSURE AND POLITICS

247

sample (Chirumbolo, 2002), found that need for closure was linearly related to political orientation: In fact, levels of dispositional need for closure increased linearly as one moved from left to right on the political spectrum. Moreover, this study showed that the relationship between need for closure and political orientation was mediated by authoritarianism. Dispositional need for closure was also found to be positively associated with general conservatism (Chirumbolo, Sensales, & Kosic, 2003; Kossowska & Van Hiel, 2003; Flemish sample), and negatively related (even if moderately so) to progressive ideology (Chirumbolo et al., 2003). Person and system blame of social problems The antecedents of causal attributions are to be found in various information-processing strategies and motivational factors (Harvey & Weary, 1984; Kelley & Michela, 1980). Within the perspective of attribution theory, a number of studies have investigated how people explain social problems such as poverty, unemployment, and criminality. A pioneering study was carried out by Feagin (1972), who found that a majority of people attributed poverty to individualistic reasons, evaluating fatalistic causes as being less important. Those results were understood in the light of the fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977) or of the need to believe in a fair world (Lerner & Miller, 1978). However, some authors have provided evidence of how cultural and social factors inuence the development of causal attributions (Guimond, Begin, & Palmer, 1989; Guimond & Palmer, 1990; Miller, 1984). In this sense, political orientation was found to have an impact on the attribution of the causes of social problems. In fact, research shows that conservatives (or right-wingers) tend to be more person-blame, while liberals (or leftwingers) tend to be more system-blame. In other words, the former tend to systematically attribute the causes of social problems to the individual, while the latter tend to systematically attribute the causes of social problems to the situation or to fate (Lewis, 1981; Pandey, Sinha, Prakash, & Tripathi, 1982; Wagstaff, 1983; Zucker & Weiner, 1993). Therefore, it seems that those attributional styles are closely linked to political orientation. THE PRESENT STUDY The aim of this paper is to examine the impact of epistemic motivations on the political sphere.

In particular, this study investigates how dispositional need for closure is associated to different political attitudes and to the personsystem blame dimensions. Building on previous results (Chirumbolo, 2002; Chirumbolo et al., 2003; Jost et al., 1999; Kemmelmeier, 1997; Kossowska & Van Hiel, 2003), it is hypothesized that high need for closure is associated with attitudes that are connected to right-wing voting habits and to conservative rightwing ideology. Therefore, those who report voting for a right-wing (or conservative) party are expected to show higher scores in need for closure as compared to those who vote for a left-wing (or liberal) party. Moreover, individuals high (vs. low) in need for closure are expected to: (1) hold more anti-immigrant attitudes; (2) have more nationalistic feelings; (3) prefer an autocratic leadership and a centralized political power; (4) prefer social order, discipline, and law; (5) give more importance to religious and spiritual values; (6) have more positive attitudes towards free enterprise. On the contrary, it is expected that high need for closure is inversely related to liberal attitudes. Therefore, individuals high (vs. low) in need for closure are expected to: (1) have less positive attitudes towards pluralism and multiculturalism; (2) have less positive attitudes towards a welfare state. As regards person-system blame, it is hypothesized that individuals who vote for right-wing parties show more individual blame and less system blame compared to people who vote for left-wing parties. Moreover, since it has been shown that epistemic motivations play a crucial role in the correspondence bias phenomenon, i.e. high (vs. low) NFCs tend to make more dispositional attributions (Webster, 1993), it is also to be expected that individuals high (vs. low) in need for closure show more person blame and less system blame when explaining the causes of major social problems. This latter hypothesis had never been tested before. METHOD Participants Two hundred and thirty-four Italian psychology students took part in this study: 40 male (17.1%) and 194 female (82.9%). Average age was 20.4 years. Participants were randomly selected at the psychology campus and asked to volunteer for an experiment. Those agreeing were subsequently invited to appear at an appointed time at the

248

CHIRUMBOLO, ARENI, SENSALES

laboratory of the Department of Social and Developmental Psychology at the University of Rome. Measures In collective sessions, participants lled out a questionnaire containing the Need for Closure scale, one measure of reported voting behaviour, a scale to assess attributional style, and several items measuring different political attitudes. Need for cognitive closure (NFC). The Italian version of the Need for Cognitive Closure scale was administered (Mannetti, Pierro, Kruglanski, Taris, & Bezinovic, 2002; Pierro et al., 1995). This is a scale made up of 42 items aimed at measuring ve different aspects of the need for closure, as conceptualized by Kruglanski and colleagues: preference for order and structure, intolerance towards ambiguity, need for predictability, closedmindedness, and decisiveness (Webster & Kruglanski, 1994). These ve subdimensions were supposed to be highly intercorrelated, because they formed part of a second-order factor, namely the need for cognitive closure. However, subsequent studies showed that decisiveness seems to assess a different dimension, relatively unrelated to the other four and the need for closure itself (De Grada, Kruglanski, Mannetti, Pierro, & Webster, 1996; Neuberg, West, & Judice, 1997). In this study, decisiveness was not computed in the general score of NFC (for details see also Chirumbolo, 2002; De Grada et al., 1999; Mannetti et al., 2002). Moreover, in previous studies the decisiveness subscale had already been found to be unrelated to political attitudes (Chirumbolo et al., 2003; Kossowska & Van Hiel, 2003). The response format is a 7-point scale (1~completely disagree; 7~completely agree). The overall reliability was satisfactory: The Cronbach alpha was .87. NFC scores were then recoded into a new variable using a median split. Those who scored below the median were categorized as low NFC (n~119). Those who scored above the median were categorized as high NFC (n~115). This variable was used as a design variable in subsequent ANOVAs. Voting. Participants were asked to state the political party they voted for at the last general elections. Successively, according to the party, the reported voting choice was recoded into a new variable with four levels: right-wing (or conservative; n~48), centre-right (or moderate

conservative; n~30), centre-left (or moderate progressive; n~96) and left-wing (or progressive; n~41). Nineteen subjects failed to indicate the party they voted for. Political attitudes. Based on Chirumbolo et al. (2003), a set of short scales was developed to measure political attitudes concerning several issues relevant to the current study. The questionnaire presented items in a randomized order, with subjects being asked to rate their agreement/disagreement on a 7-point scale (1~completely disagree; 7~completely agree). The items reected both the descriptive and prescriptive natures of ideology, as well as outlining what should be done or what is needed besides simply describing things. Anti-immigration. This scale is formed from four items referring to attitudes against immigration and immigrants. These items are Immigration increases criminality, We should put a stop to immigrants stealing Italians jobs, Illegal immigrants should be repatriated, and The laws that regulate immigration in our country are unfair and too strict (reverse scored). This scale had a Cronbach alpha of .68. Nationalism. This scale is formed from two items that stress the need for nationalistic feelings: The state must preserve our national identity and It is urgent to nd a strong national feeling once again. These two items were highly correlated and reached a Cronbach alpha of .73. Autocratic leadership and power. This scale is formed from three items that emphasize the need for an autocratic political leadership and a preference for centralized political power. The items are: We need a powerful and courageous leader people can trust, Only a powerful leader can solve our countrys problems, and Political power should be as centralized as possible. This scale reached a Cronbach alpha of .75. Law and order. This scale is formed from three items that underline the need for social order, discipline, and law. The items are: We need more order and discipline for everybody, The police should enforce the law with greater resolution, and In our country, the laws regulating the right to strike are too soft. This scale had a Cronbach alpha of .62.

NEED FOR CLOSURE AND POLITICS

249

Religiosity. This scale is formed from ve items that refer to the importance of religion to human beings. Examples of the items include: Spiritual and religious values are fundamental in everybodys life, Religion helps people live better, and Human behaviour is driven by spiritual values and religious consciousness. This scale had a Cronbach alpha of .88. Free enterprise. The attitude towards free enterprise was measured by a single item: In our country we need more free enterprise. Pluralism and multiculturalism. This scale is formed from six items that refer to a pluralistic, multicultural, and egalitarian view of the world and of society. The items making up this scale are: We should take into account the requests of minority groups, A truly pluralistic state should encourage diversity and the freedom of cultural, philosophical and political expression, All the races, religions and nations of the world have the same value, School should teach more about the culture and religion of other countries, The cultural and social features of minority groups are collective resources, and No race is superior to another. This scale reached a Cronbach alpha of .71. Welfare state. Attitudes towards the welfare state were measured by a single item: The state should regulate business and public services to favour the lower classes. Person-system blame. A scale was developed to investigate the person-system blame dimension, namely the tendency to attribute the causes of social problems such as poverty, unemployment, marginalization, and criminality to individuals, situations, or society. Items were partially taken from previous studies (Lewis, 1981; Pandey et al., 1982; Wagstaff, 1983; Zucker & Weiner, 1993), but the authors rewrote and adapted them to the Italian context. The person blame dimension was measured according to ve items with a Cronbach alpha of .73 (examples of items include: In general, the poor do not work hard enough to be successful, The unemployed are usually lazy and do not really look for a job). The system blame dimension was also measured according to ve items, which had a Cronbach alpha of .48 (examples of items include: In general, poorer people have faced difcult economic situations, Individuals who commit

a crime are usually driven by situations they experienced). RESULTS A one-way analysis of variance was carried out to test the hypothesis that those who voted for rightwing parties scored higher in need for closure. This hypothesis was supported, F(3, 211)~3.68; pv.02; Eta2~.05. The analysis of the means, and Duncan post hoc, revealed that subjects who voted for a right-wing or centre-right party had higher scores on need for closure than those who stated they voted for a centre-left or left-wing party (Table 1). In order to test the hypothesis that a need for closure is associated with political attitudes, a one-way analysis of variance was carried out using need for closure as an independent variable and scores on the political attitude scales as dependent variables. High (vs. low) need for closure individuals scored signicantly higher on Anti-immigration, F(1, 232) ~ 15.63; Eta2 ~ .063; pv.001, Nationalism, F(1, 232) ~ 6.69; Eta2 ~ .028; pv.01, Autocratic leadership, F(1, 232) ~ 10.16; Eta2 ~ .042; pv.001, and Religiosity, F(1, 232) ~ 3.99; Eta2~.017; pv.05. No signicant difference was found on the Free enterprise dimension. On the other hand, as expected, high (vs. low) need for closure individuals scored signicantly lower on the Pluralism and multiculturalism scale, F(1, 232) ~ 5.75; Eta2 ~ .024; pv.02. No signicant difference was found on the Welfare state dimension. Means are reported in Table 2. A one-way analysis of variance was performed in order to test the hypothesis that individuals who vote for right-wing parties are more individual blame and less system blame compared to people who vote for left-wing parties. Overall, this hypothesis was supported (see Table 3). A signicant difference was found both for the person blame scale, F(3, 210)~6.00; Eta2~.079;

TABLE 1 Means (and standard deviations) of need for closure in function of voting Party voted for Right-wing Need for closure 4.0
a

Centre-right 3.9
ab

Centre-left 3.7
bc

Left-wing 3.5
c

(.81)

(.90)

(.66)

(.77)

Only means with different letters are signicant.

250

CHIRUMBOLO, ARENI, SENSALES

TABLE 2 Means of political attitudes in function of need for closure Need for closure Low Anti-immigration Nationalism Law and order Autocratic leadership Religiosity Free enterprise Pluralism & multiculturalism Welfare state 3.33 4.26 3.75 2.71 4.42 4.41 6.15 5.77 High 4.03 4.73 4.50 3.32 4.80 4.42 5.92 5.58

closure subjects blamed individuals for social problems such as unemployment, poverty, and criminality. On the other hand, situational circumstances are valued equally, and situational attributions appear independent from need for closure, F(1, 230)~.001; n.s. DISCUSSION This study aimed to investigate the relationship between need for closure and particular political attitudes. Results pointed out that dispositional need for closure was related to voting choice: Individuals who voted for a right-wing (or conservative) party displayed higher levels of need for closure compared to those who voted for a left-wing (or liberal/progressive) party. Need for closure was found to be positively related to conservative attitudes such as anti-immigration, nationalism, law and order, claims for autocratic leadership and centralized political power, and religiosity. Need for closure was also found to be negatively related to liberal attitudes such as pluralism, multiculturalism, and egalitarianism. Interestingly, no difference was found as regards socioeconomic stands such as the need for free enterprise and the welfare state. Moreover, high NFCs (vs. low NFCs) are more likely to attribute the causes of major social problems to individuals: In other words, they blamed individuals rather than circumstances for issues such as poverty, crime, and unemployment. These results seem to support the hypothesis that conservative beliefs may satisfy cognitive motivational needs to reduce uncertainty, ambiguity, and chaos or, in other words, that epistemic needs for closure and certainty are better served by ideologies that are traditional, conservative, or right wing in content (Jost et al., 1999). For example, an autocratic leader and centralized political power would assure faster decisions, reduce discussions and hesitations and, as a result, promote a faster epistemic closure (Kruglanski, 1996b). Likewise, religiosity and transcendental values would preserve social order while at once protecting individuals from uncertainty (Schwartz & Huismans, 1995). On the other hand, a pluralistic and multicultural world would reduce the predictability of the structure of social reality, increasing its ambiguity: It is therefore more attractive to individuals with a low need for closure. Overall, the results of the present study reproduce and extend previous knowledge on this topic. In fact, whereas most past research was

TABLE 3 Means of attributional styles in function of voting Party voted for Right-wing Centre-right Centre-left Left-wing Person blame System blame 2.65a 3.94a 2.58a 4.43b 2.12b 4.41b 1.98b 4.62b

Different letters indicate signicant difference at pv.05 level (Duncan post hoc).

pv.01, and the system blame scale, F(3, 210) ~ 5.13; Eta2~.068; pv.01. Subjects who voted for a right-wing or centre-right party, namely for conservative or moderately conservative parties, tended to attribute the causes of social problems more to individual dispositions and less to situational circumstances compared to subjects who voted for a left-wing or centre-left party. No difference, however, was found between moderate conservatives and left-wingers as regards the system blame dimension. Means are reported in Table 3. Again, an ANOVA was conducted to test the hypothesis that subjects with high need for closure would blame individuals for social problems, while, on the contrary, low need for closure subjects would blame situational circumstances. This hypothesis gained partial support (see Table 4). Signicant difference was found for the person blame scale, F(1, 230) ~ 12.05; Eta2~.050; pv.01: High (vs. low) need for
TABLE 4 Means of attributional styles in function of need for closure Need for closure Low Person blame System blame 2.06 4.37 High 2.48 4.36

NEED FOR CLOSURE AND POLITICS

251

conducted in the United States (Jost et al., 1999) or northern European countries such as Germany (Kemmelmeier, 1997), Belgium, and Poland (Kossowska & Van Hiel, 2003), the present study is one of the few conducted in a Latin (or southern European) country. In replicating these results in a considerably different political context like that of Italy, this research conrms the cross-cultural validity of the evidence gathered. Furthermore, the present study adds something new, examining the link between need for closure and the attributional style of reasoning about social issues. The relationship between intolerance towards ambiguity and political attitudes has been widely investigated in classical studies on authoritarianism (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunwik, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950), tender-tough mindedness (Eysenck, 1954), dogmatism (Rokeach, 1960), conservatism (Wilson, 1973), and in more recent research on value pluralism theory (Tetlock, 1983, 1986), and context theory (Sidanius, 1988). Nevertheless, according to Durrheim (1997), research linking cognitive style and politics was often criticized for not being independent from ideology and content. Very recently, however, Jost et al. (2003) have tried to integrate theories on conservatism within the motivated cognition approach, to which the construct of need for closure undoubtedly belongs (Kruglanski, 1996a). In their authoritative analysis they claim that certain social, personal, and political circumstances can contribute to the development and maintenance of attitudes favourable to the social and political status quo, discouraging attempts to reduce inequality. These situations can also amplify epistemic and ideological needs to resolve uncertainty and to preserve what is familiar and well known. Conservative ideologies would satisfy these needs because such ideologies are relatively low in ambiguity, novelty, and exibility (Jost et al., 2003). In fact, under conditions of high need for closure, because of the urgency tendency, people tend to rely on chronic accessible knowledge and beliefs and, because of the permanent tendency, they tend to perpetuate and defend those beliefs. On the one hand, the need for closure would perpetuate the current ideology of individuals, whatever its contents. This would mean that increasing need for closure among people whose accessible ideological positions are conservative would result in a stronger relation between need for closure and conservatism, whereas increasing need for closure among people who are liberal would result in a strengthened relation between

need for closure and liberal attitudes such as political tolerance (Jost et al., 1999, 2003). According to this point of view, the lay epistemic theory would somewhat support the hypothesis that rigidity may be displayed in different ideological contexts and is not necessarily peculiar to a right-wing orientation or conservatism. Kossowska and Van Hiel (2003) recently found empirical evidence for this hypothesis. In a Flemish sample, need for closure was related, as expected, to conservative political beliefs. Interestingly enough, the Polish sample saw need for closure actually correlated with progressive economic beliefs, suggesting that higher need for closure among individuals whose most pervasive political attitudes and values were progressive and communist brought a reinforced relationship between need for closure and left-wing orientation. This result would further point out that higher levels of need for closure are connected to and support the traditional and prevailing beliefs and values present in a given social context, whether labelled as right-wing (conservative) or left-wing (liberal/progressive). On the other hand, however, high NFC is not indifferent to specic ideological contents. An ideology that guarantees or supports epistemic stability, clarity, order, and regularity should be favoured by high NFC individuals over contents that, on the contrary, support instability, ambiguity, and diversity (Jost et al., 2003). The present study found empirical support for these hypotheses. In fact, respondents with high (vs. low) NFC found themselves in greater agreement on issues aimed at guaranteeing order and stability at the level of society, such as rejecting immigrants and valuing the nation, law, order, and rigid/autocratic power. At the same time, they disagreed more on topics that could expose society to the risk of instability and insecurity, such as supporting ethnic and social minorities or valuing cultural differences and diversity of expressions. Interestingly, a need for closure that is nonspecic with regard to many epistemic contents becomes partial or specic with regard to contents that are explicitly related to closure (Jost et al., 2003). In this sense, according to the authors, it is possible to argue that the ideological and psychological senses of conservatism are literally the manifestations of motivated closed-mindedness. Although there is still a lot to do, especially at an experimental level, the results of the present study provide additional empirical support to hypotheses concerned with the relationship between need for closure and particular political

252

CHIRUMBOLO, ARENI, SENSALES

attitudes connected to conservatism and rightwing political orientation in Western societies.

Manuscript received April 2003 Revised manuscript received December 2003

REFERENCES
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunwik, E., Levinson, D., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper Book. Chirumbolo, A. (2002). The relationship between need for cognitive closure and political orientation: The mediating role of authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 603610. Chirumbolo, A., Sensales, G., & Kosic, A. (2003). Ideologia, personalita e bisogno di chiusura cogni` tiva [Ideology, personality and need for cognitive closure]. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 30, 6994. De Grada, E., Kruglanski, A. W., Mannetti, L., & Pierro, A. (1999). Motivated cognition and group interaction: Need for closure affects the contents and the processes of collective negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 346365. De Grada, E., Kruglanski, A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., & Webster, D. (1996). Unanalisi strutturale comparativa delle versioni usa e italiana della scala di bisogno di chiusura cognitiva di webster e kruglanski [A comparative structural analysis of the US and Italian versions of the need for cognitive closure scale by Webster and Kruglanski]. Testing, Psicometria, Metodologia, 3, 518. Dijksterhuis, A., Van Kippenberg, A., Kruglanski, A. W., & Schaper, C. (1996). Motivated social cognition: Need for closure effects on memory and judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 254270. Durrheim, K. (1997). Theoretical conundrum: The politics and science of theorizing authoritarian cognition. Political Psychology, 18, 625 644. Eysenck, H. (1954). The psychology of politics. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Feagin, J. (1972). Poverty: We still believe that God helps those who help themselves. Psychology Today, 6, 101129. Freund, T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Schpitzajzen, A. (1985). The freezing and unfreezing of impressional primacy: Effects of the need for structure and the fear of invalidity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 479487. Guimond, S., Begin, G., & Palmer, D. (1989). Education and causal attribution: The development of person-blame and system-blame ideology. Social Psychological Quarterly, 52, 126140. Guimond, S., & Palmer, D. (1990). Type of academic training and causal attribution for social problems. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 6175. Harvey, J. H., & Weary, G. (1984). Current issues in attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 35, 427429. Heaton, A., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1991). Person perception by introverts and extraverts under time pressure: Need for closure effects. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin, 17, 161165.

Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339375. Jost, J. T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Simon, L. (1999). Effects of epistemic motivation on conservatism, intolerance, and other system-justifying attitudes. In L. L. Thompson, J. M. Levine, & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 91116). Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 457501. Kemmelmeier, M. (1997). Need for closure and political orientation among German university students. Journal of Social Psychology, 137, 787789. Kossowska, M., & Van Hiel, A. (2003). The relationship between need for closure and conservative beliefs in Western and Eastern Europe. Political Psychology, 24, 501518. Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemic and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York: Plenum Press. Kruglanski, A. W. (1996a). Motivated social cognition: Principles of the interface. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. New York: Guilford Press. Kruglanski, A. W. (1996b). Motivated gatekeeper of our minds: Need for closure effects on interpersonal phenomena. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), The handbook of motivation and cognition, Vol. 3 (pp. 465496). New York: Guilford Press. Kruglanski, A. W., & Freund, T. (1983). The freezing and un-freezing of lay inferences: Effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping and numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448468. Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. (1991). Group members reactions to opinion deviates and conformists at varying degrees of proximity to decision deadline and of environmental noise. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 212225. Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: Seizing and freezing. Psychological Review, 103, 263283. Kruglanski, A. W., Webster, D., & Klem, A. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 861876. Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 10301051. Lewis, A. (1981). Attributions and politics. Personality and Individual Differences, 2, 14. Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Kruglanski, A. W., Taris, T., & Bezinovic, P. (2002). A cross-cultural study of the need for cognitive closure scale: Comparing its structure in Croatia, Italy, USA and the Netherlands. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 139156. Mayseless, O., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1987). What makes you so sure? Effects of epistemic motivations on judgmental condence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 39, 162183.

NEED FOR CLOSURE AND POLITICS

253

Miller, J. G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 961978. Neuberg, S. L., West, S. G., & Judice, T. N. (1997). What the need for closure scale measures and what it does not: Toward differentiating among related epistemic motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 13961412. Pandey, J., Sinha, Y., Prakash, A., & Tripathi, R. (1982). Right-left political ideologies and attribution of the causes of poverty. European Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 327331. Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Converso, D., Garsia, V., Miglietta, A. M., Ravena, M., & Rubini, M. (1995). Caratteristiche strutturali della versione italiana della scala di bisogno di chiusura cognitiva (di Webster e Kruglanski). [Structural characteristic of the Italian version of the need for cognitive closure scale]. Testing, Psicometria, Metodologia, 2, 125141. Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., De Grada, E., Livi, S., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2003). Autocracy bias in informal groups under Need for Closure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 405417. Rokeach, M. (1960). The open and closed mind: Investigations into the source of beliefs systems and personality systems. New York: Basic Books. Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 173220). New York: Academic Press. Schwartz, S. H., & Huismans, S. (1995). Value priorities and religiosity in four Western religions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58, 88107. Sidanius, J. (1988). Political sophistication and political deviance: A structural equation examination of

context theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 3751. Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (2001). Individual differences in information processing. In A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intraindividual processes (pp. 284304). Oxford: Blackwell. Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Cognitive style and political ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 118126. Tetlock, P. E. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 819827. Wagstaff, G. (1983). Attitude to poverty, the protestant ethic, and political afliation: A preliminary investigation. Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 4547. Webster, D. (1993). Motivated argumentation and reduction of the overattribution bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 261271. Webster, D., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 10491062. Webster, D., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1998). Cognitive and social consequences of the need for cognitive closure. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology, Vol. 8 (pp. 133173). Chichester, UK: John Wiley. Webster, D., Richter, L., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1996). On leaping to conclusions when feeling tired: Mental fatigue effects on impressional primacy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 181195. Wilson, G. (1973). The psychology of conservatism. London: Academic Press. Zucker, G., & Weiner, B. (1993). Conservatism and perceptions of poverty: An attributional analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 925943.