2010 Publications
Shared Cognitions and Shared Theories: Telling More Than We Can Know by Ourselves?
Brandon Randolph-Seng Mario P. Casa de Calvo
Texas Tech University Texas A&M University - Kingsville
Tammy Lowery Zacchilli Jacquline L. Cottle
Saint Leo University Roger Williams University
Despite recent advances in group cognition research, a clear conceptualization of collective cognition is lacking. In order to assist researchers in their conceptualization of group cognition, a separation between shared cognitions and shared theories is proposed. Shared cognitions can be operationally defined as cognitive functioning shared by a set of group members (e.g., shared rationale for decision making process), while shared theories can be understood as perceptual beliefs shared by a set of group members (e.g., shared norms, values, identities). Using this dual process model, evidence for a conceptualization of group cognition as shared social theories will be delineated, and implications for understanding past research in group cognition and decision making will be discussed.
Brandon Randolph-Seng Mario P. Casa de Calvo
Texas Tech University Texas A&M University - Kingsville
Tammy Lowery Zacchilli Jacquline L. Cottle
Saint Leo University Roger Williams University
Despite recent advances in group cognition research, a clear conceptualization of collective cognition is lacking. In order to assist researchers in their conceptualization of group cognition, a separation between shared cognitions and shared theories is proposed. Shared cognitions can be operationally defined as cognitive functioning shared by a set of group members (e.g., shared rationale for decision making process), while shared theories can be understood as perceptual beliefs shared by a set of group members (e.g., shared norms, values, identities). Using this dual process model, evidence for a conceptualization of group cognition as shared social theories will be delineated, and implications for understanding past research in group cognition and decision making will be discussed.
| Shared Cognitions and Shared Theories: Telling More Than We Can Know by Ourselves? |
Self-Esteem and the Flexibility of Romantic Standards
Virgil Zeigler-Hill, Mary C. Celer, and Teddi B. Sisemore
University of Southern Mississippi
The present study examined the association between self-esteem and the flexibility of romantic standards. Previous research has shown that individuals who view themselves positively on specific domains tend to be less flexible in their standards for potential romantic partners. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether the flexibility of romantic standards was associated with self-esteem and ideal romantic standards. Participants (N = 189) were asked to complete a measure of self-esteem and consider their minimum, ideal, and maximum standards for potential romantic partners across various levels of relational involvement ranging from a single date to marriage. The results of the present study found that higher levels of self-esteem were associated with more flexible standards for potential relationship partners but only for those with relatively low ideal standards. relationships faster than semantic relationships. Interestingly, word relationship scores from database norms also predicted the RT for both semantic and associative judgments. Experiment 2 tested associative and semantic priming in a traditional lexical decision task, which also showed that associative word relationships were judged faster than semantic relationships. These findings are discussed as to how associative and semantic information is processed in memory.
Virgil Zeigler-Hill, Mary C. Celer, and Teddi B. Sisemore
University of Southern Mississippi
The present study examined the association between self-esteem and the flexibility of romantic standards. Previous research has shown that individuals who view themselves positively on specific domains tend to be less flexible in their standards for potential romantic partners. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether the flexibility of romantic standards was associated with self-esteem and ideal romantic standards. Participants (N = 189) were asked to complete a measure of self-esteem and consider their minimum, ideal, and maximum standards for potential romantic partners across various levels of relational involvement ranging from a single date to marriage. The results of the present study found that higher levels of self-esteem were associated with more flexible standards for potential relationship partners but only for those with relatively low ideal standards. relationships faster than semantic relationships. Interestingly, word relationship scores from database norms also predicted the RT for both semantic and associative judgments. Experiment 2 tested associative and semantic priming in a traditional lexical decision task, which also showed that associative word relationships were judged faster than semantic relationships. These findings are discussed as to how associative and semantic information is processed in memory.
| Self-Esteem and the Flexibility of Romantic Standards |
Access into Memory: Differences in Judgments and Priming for Semantic and Associative Memory
Erin M. Buchanan
University of Mississippi
Two experiments measuring the response times (RTs) of semantic and associative information processing are presented here. Experiment 1 tested the speed of judgments of associative and semantic word pairs (Maki, 2007a), and participants were able to judge associative relationships faster than semantic relationships. Interestingly, word relationship scores from database norms also predicted the RT for both semantic and associative judgments. Experiment 2 tested associative and semantic priming in a traditional lexical decision task, which also showed that associative word relationships were judged faster than semantic relationships. These findings are discussed as to how associative and semantic information is processed in memory.
Erin M. Buchanan
University of Mississippi
Two experiments measuring the response times (RTs) of semantic and associative information processing are presented here. Experiment 1 tested the speed of judgments of associative and semantic word pairs (Maki, 2007a), and participants were able to judge associative relationships faster than semantic relationships. Interestingly, word relationship scores from database norms also predicted the RT for both semantic and associative judgments. Experiment 2 tested associative and semantic priming in a traditional lexical decision task, which also showed that associative word relationships were judged faster than semantic relationships. These findings are discussed as to how associative and semantic information is processed in memory.
| Access into Memory: Differences in Judgments and Priming for Semantic and Associative Memory |