Author's Keywords: Ideology, Political Cognition, Attribution, Identity, Communication	Convention Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: ISPP 31st Annual Scientific Meeting URL: http://ispp.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p256313_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Rosenberg, Shawn. and Wrigley, Ted. "The Structure of Political Cognition:An Experimental Study of a Chemistry Problem, Causal Attribution, Social Identity and Political Communication" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISPP 31st Annual Scientific Meeting, Sciences Po, Paris, France, Jul 09, 2008 <Not Available>. 2010-03-12 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p256313_index.html>

Rosenberg, S. and Wrigley, T. , 2008-07-09 "The Structure of Political Cognition:An Experimental Study of a Chemistry Problem, Causal Attribution, Social Identity and Political Communication" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISPP 31st Annual Scientific Meeting, Sciences Po, Paris, France <Not Available>. 2010-03-12 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p256313_index.html

Publication Type: Paper (prepared oral presentation) Abstract: Most of research on political reasoning has been informed by the work on social cognition. A small number of political psychologists have explored the same subject, political cognition, but have done so in a way that is informed by developmental psychology. For the most part, the relationship between these two approaches remains unaddressed. In the present paper, we clarify the nature of the differences between these two approaches and then present research that examines the relevance of the developmental approach to the more popular social psychological alternative. The hypothesis tested is that individual differences in the general structure of people’s political cognition affect their performance on more typical socio-cognitive studies of political information processing. In a manner consistent with developmental research, subjects participate in a “clinical” experiment to test their problem definition and solving strategies. This is used to assess possible individual differences in the structure of their thinking. Subjects then participate in three classic social cognition experiments, one drawn from work on cognitive dissonance, one from attribution theory and one from schema theory, that have oriented much of the political cognition research. They also respond to standard survey measures of ethnic and partisan identification. Using standard ANOVA techniques, subjects’ performances on these social psychological experiments and survey instruments was analyzed to determine if the cognitive structural differences identified in the developmentally oriented research predict to differences in performance of the socio-cognitive tasks. The results suggest that they do. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications of this research for the study of political reasoning and cognition.

Kracking the missing data problem: Applying Krackhardt’s Cognitive Social Structures to School-Based Social Networks

Thinking about Chemistry, Social Identity and Political Tolerance: A Multi-Method Study of Individual Differences in Political Cognition