Relationship between cognitive flexibility, intellectual humility, and openness to disagreement

Abstract

In this era rife with socio-political controversies, ideological polarization has been widening, which may be due to human beings’ inclination towards motivated reasoning. Although it is unsettling to be exposed to opposing views, counterarguments may be stimulating and allow us to gain a more holistic view of the issue. Using self-report measures, the current study aims to examine the relationship between Cognitive Flexibility, Intellectual Humility, Affects, and Openness to Disagreement as participants viewed arguments that conflict with their endorsed beliefs. To tap into participants’ Openness to Disagreement authentically, this study arranged seven controversial issues and composed opposing comments that participants are required to respond. Intellectual Humility was positively correlated with perceiving opposing views as credible, attributing the difference in arguments respectfully, and showing the behavioral tendency to learn from opposers. However, no correlation was found between Intellectual Humility and the change in opinion strength after viewing opposing comments. Cognitive Flexibility was only found positively associated with judging opposing views as credible. Moderation analyses revealed that amongst participants with more Negative Affect, those with higher Intellectual Humility were more likely to show respectful attribution and a behavioral tendency to learn from opposers than those with lower Intellectual Humility in situations where they came across opposing comments on different issues. This pattern was less visible for participants with a lower level of Negative Affect. These results underscored the importance of Intellectual Humility in its relationship with Openness to Disagreement and provided some insights into heightening Openness to Disagreement amongst individuals with varying levels of Intellectual Humility.