Dataset Information

Group Polarization Revisited: A Processing Effort Account.

ABSTRACT: Research has shown that processes of social comparison as well as persuasive argumentation are involved in group polarization. We propose a processing effort account according to which the role of these processes in determining group polarization is contingent on ability and motivation. The impact of information regarding others' positions on group polarization should be higher given low (vs. high) ability or motivation. In contrast, the impact of persuasive argumentation should be higher given high (vs. low) ability and motivation. Results in line with these assumptions were obtained in two experiments in which individuals' ability (Experiment 1) or motivation (Experiment 2), information regarding group average position, and argument persuasiveness were manipulated. Furthermore, consistent findings were also obtained in a third experiment testing the role of motivation in real group discussions. A processing effort account provides a novel perspective for investigating the development of group extremity.

SUBMITTER: Sieber J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6732819 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Group Polarization Revisited: A Processing Effort Account.

Sieber Janusch J Ziegler René R

Personality & social psychology bulletin 20190319 10

Research has shown that processes of social comparison as well as persuasive argumentation are involved in group polarization. We propose a processing effort account according to which the role of these processes in determining group polarization is contingent on ability and motivation. The impact of information regarding others' positions on group polarization should be higher given low (vs. high) ability or motivation. In contrast, the impact of persuasive argumentation should be higher given ...[more]

PMID: 30885061

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose: Poor forced vital capacity (FVC) effort has been considered to be the main reason for FVC reduction by the ATS/ERS guideline; however, this has rarely been mentioned in previous studies. The present study aims to determine whether reduced FVC in asthmatic children is correlated to poor FVC effort. Methods: A total of 209 asthmatic children within 5-13 years old were included and divided into reduced FVC ("restricted," n = 66) and typical obstruction group ("obstructed," n = 143). Forced expiratory flows before and after bronchodilation were recorded in asthmatic children. The differences in clinical characteristics, spirometric results, FVC effort, and bronchodilator response were compared between two groups. Exhalation time (ET) was divided into effective ET (ETe) and plateau ET (ETp) by the start point of exhalation plateau on the time-volume curve. FVC effort was assessed by ET, ETp, and back extrapolated volume (EV)/FVC (%). Results: Asthmatic children in the restricted group had significantly higher slow vital capacity (SVC)/FVC (%), higher EV/FVC (%), shorter ET, shorter ETe, and longer ETp, when compared with those with obstructed. In the obstructed group, ET (r = 0.201, P = 0.016) and ETe (r = 0.496, P < 0.001) positively correlated with FVC, and ETp (r = -0.224, P = 0.007) negatively correlated with FVC. In the restricted group, FVC positively correlated with ETe (r = 0.350, P = 0.004) but not ET and ETp. FVC z-score significantly correlated with total IgE (n = 51, r = -0.349, P = 0.012) and with FEF25-75% z-score (n = 66, r = 0.531, P < 0.001) in the restricted group. The further logistic regression revealed that the risk of restricted increased by 1.12 (95% CI, 1.04-1.22, P = 0.005) with every 1% increase in %ΔFVC. In subjects with restricted and bronchodilation tests, %ΔFVC was significantly associated with FeNO (n = 29, r = 0.386, P = 0.039), FEF25-75% z-score (n = 29, r = -0.472, P = 0.010), and SVC/FVC (%) (n = 19, r = 0.477, P = 0.039) but not with EV/FVC (%), ET, ETe, or ETp (P > 0.05). Conclusion: These findings suggested that "poor FVC effort" does not account for the FVC reduction in asthmatic children. Short ET and high SVC/FVC (%) are characteristics of reduced FVC.

Project description:Purpose Pupillary responses captured via pupillometry (measurement of pupillary dilation and constriction during the performance of a cognitive task) are psychophysiological indicators of cognitive effort, attention, arousal, and resource engagement. Pupillometry may be a promising tool for enhancing our understanding of the relationship between cognition and language in people with and without aphasia. Interpretation of pupillary responses is complex. This study was designed as a stepping-stone for future pupillometric studies involving people with aphasia. Asking comprehension questions is common in language processing research involving people with and without aphasia. However, the influence of comprehension questions on pupillometric indices of task engagement (tonic responses) and cognitive effort (task-evoked responses of the pupil [TERPs]) is unknown. We tested whether asking comprehension questions influenced pupillometric results of adults without aphasia during a syntactic processing task. Method Forty adults without aphasia listened to easy (canonical) and difficult (noncanonical) sentences in two conditions: one that contained an explicit comprehension task (question condition) and one that did not (no-question condition). The influence of condition and canonicity on pupillary responses was examined. Results The influence of canonicity was only significant in the question condition: TERPs for difficult sentences were larger than TERPs for easy sentences. Tonic responses did not differ between conditions. Conclusions Although participants had similar levels of attentiveness in both conditions, increases in indices of cognitive effort during syntactic processing were significant only when participants expected comprehension questions. Results contribute to a body of evidence indicating the importance of task design and careful linguistic stimulus control when using pupillometry to study language processing. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13480368.

Project description:Current evidence demonstrates that even though some non-native listeners can achieve native-like performance for speech perception tasks in quiet, the presence of a background noise is much more detrimental to speech intelligibility for non-native compared to native listeners. Even when performance is equated across groups, it is likely that greater listening effort is required for non-native listeners. Importantly, the added listening effort might result in increased fatigue and a reduced ability to successfully perform multiple tasks simultaneously. Task-evoked pupil responses have been demonstrated to be a reliable measure of cognitive effort and can be useful in clarifying those aspects. In this study we compared the pupil response for 23 native English speakers and 27 Italian speakers of English as a second language. Speech intelligibility was tested for sentences presented in quiet and in background noise at two performance levels that were matched across groups. Signal-to-noise levels corresponding to these sentence intelligibility levels were pre-determined using an adaptive intelligibility task. Pupil response was significantly greater in non-native compared to native participants across both intelligibility levels. Therefore, for a given intelligibility level, a greater listening effort is required when listening in a second language in order to understand speech in noise. Results also confirmed that pupil response is sensitive to speech intelligibility during language comprehension, in line with previous research. However, contrary to our predictions, pupil response was not differentially modulated by intelligibility levels for native and non-native listeners. The present study corroborates that pupillometry can be deemed as a valid measure to be used in speech perception investigation, because it is sensitive to differences both across participants, such as listener type, and across conditions, such as variations in the level of speech intelligibility. Importantly, pupillometry offers us the possibility to uncover differences in listening effort even when those do not emerge in the performance level of individuals.

Dataset Information

Group Polarization Revisited: A Processing Effort Account.

Publications

Group Polarization Revisited: A Processing Effort Account.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets