The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 87 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”
Abstract
A theoretical framework is outlined in which the key construct is the need for (nonspecific) cognitive closure. The need for closure is a desire for definite knowledge on some issue. It represents a dimension of stable individual differences as well as a situationally evocable state. The need for closure has widely ramifying consequences for social-cognitive phenomena at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and group levels of analysis. Those consequences derive from 2 general tendencies, those of urgency and performance. The urgency tendency represents an individual's inclination to attain closure as soon as possible, and the permanence tendency represents an individual's inclination to maintain it for as long as possible. Empirical evidence for present theory attests to diverse need for closure effects on fundamental social psychological phenomena, including impression formation, stereotyping, attribution, persuasion, group decision making, and language use in intergroup contexts.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“the default mindset of most adults is a relatively inactive state where the past unduly influences the present (e.g., Hart et al., 2009; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996).”
From Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health (2010) · cites this paper as Kruglanski & Webster, 1996
Citations
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7 · Cited by 26,772
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
A theory of social comparison processes
Festinger, L. (1954) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872675400700202 · Cited by 20,926
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Morvan, C., & O’Connor, A. (2017) · Macat Library eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781912282432 · Cited by 18,284
The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud
Freud, S. (1953) · Cited by 17,730
The psychology of interpersonal relations
Heider, F. (1958) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089062 · Cited by 17,189
Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior
Miller, K. A. J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1988) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2070638 · Cited by 15,406
Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values.
Sorge, A. M., & Hofstede, G. (1983) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393017 · Cited by 15,195
The case for motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 · Cited by 9,022
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 401–500 of 1,001
On the psychology of extremism: How motivational imbalance breeds intemperance.
Kruglanski, A. W., Szumowska, E., Köpetz, C., Vallerand, R. J., & Pierro, A. (2020) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000260 · Cited by 101
“In this vein, Kruglanski (1989; 2004; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Kruglanski, Pierro, Mannetti & DeGrada, 2006) discussed closed mindedness produced by a heightened need for cognitive closure specifically, rather than discussing extremism as a more general motivational phenomenon not connected to…”
BackgroundSelf-citation“You Need to Stop Talking About This!”: Verbal Rumination and the Costs of Social Support
Afifi, T. D., Afifi, W. A., Merrill, A. F., Denes, A., & Davis, S. M. (2013) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/hcre.12012 · Cited by 106
“Other personality traits, like a need for closure (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996), could also interact with verbal and brooding rumination to affect people’s anxiety.”
BackgroundGilovich, T. D., & Griffin, D. W. (2010) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001015 · Cited by 93
The calibration of expert judgment: heuristics and biases beyond the laboratory
Koehler, D. J., Brenner, L., & Griffin, D. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.041 · Cited by 146
Temptation and resistance: An integrated model of consumption impulse formation and enactment
Dholakia, U. M. (2000) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11 · Cited by 405
Shiloh, S., Koren, S., & Zakay, D. (2001) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00073-8 · Cited by 88
Framing innovation: negotiating shared frames during early design phases
Hey, J. H. G., Joyce, C. K., & Beckman, S. L. (2007) · J of Design Research · doi:10.1504/jdr.2007.015564 · Cited by 96
“We are also examining how different cognitive styles (Belbin, 1981; Kirton, 1989; Kruglanski and Webster, 1996) help or hinder the framing process in teams.”
BackgroundThe Dynamics of Consensus Building in Intracultural and Intercultural Negotiations
Liu, L. A., Friedman, R., Barry, B., Gelfand, M. J., & Zhang, Z.-X. (2012) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839212453456 · Cited by 90
“In intercultural interactions, heightened need for closure will lead negotiators not only to ‘‘freeze’’ the mental model early but also to instigate stereotypical judgments toward culturally distant others because they feel negatively disposed toward those with different opinions and cultural traits (Kruglanski and We…”
BackgroundInfluentialChong, D., van Eerde, W., Chai, K., & Rutte, C. G. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2010.2048914 · Cited by 97
Steps, stages, and structure: Finding compensatory order in scientific theories.
Rutjens, B. T., van Harreveld, F., van der Pligt, J., Kreemers, L. M., & Noordewier, M. K. (2012) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/a0028716 · Cited by 90
Abstraction increases hypocrisy
Lammers, J. (2011) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.07.006 · Cited by 90
Erb, H., Kruglanski, A. W., Chun, W. Y., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Spiegel, S. (2003) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/10463280340000009 · Cited by 85
“…goals, such as accuracy (Chaiken et al., 1989; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), accountability (Tetlock, 1985), need for cognition (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982), the need to evaluate (Jarvis & Petty, 1996), or the need for cognitive closure (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Webster & Kruglanski, 1998).”
BackgroundSelf-citationResick, C. J., Murase, T., Randall, K. R., & DeChurch, L. A. (2014) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.03.005 · Cited by 95
“However, these studies have focused exclusively on members’ motivation to engage in deep-level information processing (i.e., members’ epistemic motivation; De Dreu & Carnevale, 2003; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996).”
BackgroundNeed for Closure and Political Orientation Among German University Students
Kemmelmeier, M. (1997) · The Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/00224549709595501 · Cited by 87
The influence of need for closure on consumer’s choice behaviour
Vermeir, I., Van Kenhove, P., & Hendrickx, H. (2002) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0167-4870(02)00135-6 · Cited by 86
Need for Cognition Can Magnify or Attenuate Priming Effects in Social Judgment
Petty, R. E., DeMarree, K. G., Briñol, P., Horcajo, J., & Strathman, A. J. (2008) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167208316692 · Cited by 86
Motivated Responding in Studies of Factual Learning
Khanna, K., & Sood, G. (2017) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-017-9395-7 · Cited by 86
Hogg, M. A. (2021) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2021.04.004 · Cited by 86
Molden, D. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2012) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734689.013.0020 · Cited by 86
Social Psychological Factors in Lifestyle Change and Their Relevance to Policy
Maio, G. R., Verplanken, B., Manstead, A. S. R., Stroebe, W., Abraham, C., Sheeran, P., & Conner, M. T. (2007) · Social Issues and Policy Review · doi:10.1111/j.1751-2409.2007.00005.x · Cited by 87
“Other research and theory indicates that stress (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Muraven & Baumeister, 2000) and habit formation also impede the ability to resist temptation (Wood, Quinn, & Kashy, 2002), and this impediment is also evident for healthy eating behavior in particular (Wardle & Gibson,…”
BackgroundInformational length and order of presentation as determinants of persuasion
Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Erb, H., Spiegel, S., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.09.003 · Cited by 85
Self-citationEmotional Dynamics in Conflict and Negotiation: Individual, Dyadic, and Group Processes
Kleef, G. A. V., & Côté, S. (2017) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104714 · Cited by 95
Leroy, S., & Glomb, T. M. (2018) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2017.1184 · Cited by 98
How Belief-Credence Dualism Explains Away Pragmatic Encroachment
Jackson, E. G. (2019) · The Philosophical Quarterly · doi:10.1093/pq/pqz006 · Cited by 88
Socio-Psychological Barriers to Confl ict Resolution
Bar‐Tal, D. (2011) · doi:10.4324/9780203834091-16 · Cited by 85
“Theoretically they could be easily changed, but the essence of their functioning as barriers is their freezing (Kruglanski, 2004; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996).”
Response to restrictive policies: Reconciling system justification and psychological reactance
Laurin, K., Kay, A. C., Proudfoot, D., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2013) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.06.004 · Cited by 91
“Likewise, the effects of needs for closure – another need that people do not readily admit guides their behavior (Kruglanski, 1996) – are most noticeable in situations that rush people (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; also see Callan, Sutton, & Dovale, 2010).”
BackgroundThe Frog in Kierkegaard’s Beer: Finding Meaning in the Threat‐Compensation Literature
Proulx, T., & Heine, S. J. (2010) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00304.x · Cited by 88
“Underlying all of these ‘threatcompensation’ processes may be a need for coherence (Antonovsky, 1979), a unity principle (Epstein, 1981), a need for cognitive closure (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996) or a need for structure (Neuberg & Newsom, 1993).”
BackgroundDeterminants of Investors’ Information Acquisition: Credibility and Confirmation
Thayer, J. M. (2010) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.00000015 · Cited by 85
The impact of Internet interactivity and need for closure on consumer preference
Amichai‐Hamburger, Y., Fine, A., & Goldstein, A. (2003) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0747-5632(03)00041-4 · Cited by 84
Information distortion in the evaluation of a single option
Bond, S., Carlson, K. A., Meloy, M. G., Russo, J. E., & Tanner, R. J. (2006) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.04.009 · Cited by 85
“For example, the pursuit of coherence might support the desire of individuals to feel certain about their actions (Mills, 1965), to reduce eVort expenditure (Payne, Bettman, & Luce, 1998), or to bring about a state of cognitive closure ( Kruglanski & Webster, 1996 ).”
BackgroundAn Analysis of Methods for Intercultural Training
Fowler, S. M., & Yamaguchi, M. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108854184.008 · Cited by 91
Psychological Factors in Radicalization
Webber, D. J., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2016) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118923986.ch2 · Cited by 87
Self-citationTARGET ARTICLE: On Parametric Continuities in the World of Binary Either Ors
Kruglanski, A. W., Erbs, H.-P., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Chun, W. Y. (2006) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1703_1 · Cited by 81
“…of accuracy (Chaiken et al., 1989; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), accountability (Tetlock, 1985), the need for cognition (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982), the need to evaluate (Jarvis & Petty, 1996), or the need for cognitive closure (Kruglanski, 2004; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Webster & Kruglanski, 1998).”
Self-citationTwelve tips for thriving in the face of clinical uncertainty
Gheihman, G., Johnson, M., & Simpkin, A. L. (2019) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2019.1579308 · Cited by 90
“Studies link intolerance of uncertainty (as defined by heightened anxiety and feeling “stumped” or “helpless”) to burnout, ineffective communication strategies, cognitive biases, and inappropriate resource use (Kruglanski and Webster 1996; Cooke et al. 2013; Bhise et al. 2018b).”
BackgroundBreaking the Myth of Cyber Doom: Securitization and Normalization of Novel Threats
Gomez, M. A., & Whyte, C. (2021) · International Studies Quarterly · doi:10.1093/isq/sqab034 · Cited by 83
The digital transformation of knowledge order: a model for the analysis of the epistemic crisis
Neuberger, C., Bartsch, A., Fröhlich, R., Hanitzsch, T., Reinemann, C., & Schindler, J. (2023) · Annals of the International Communication Association · doi:10.1080/23808985.2023.2169950 · Cited by 92
Kurz und gut: Eine deutsche Kurzskala zur Erfassung des Bedürfnisses nach kognitiver Geschlossenheit
Schlink, S., & Walther, E. (2007) · Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie · doi:10.1024/0044-3514.38.3.153 · Cited by 88
Bondt, W. F. M. D., & Thaler, R. H. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.040 · Cited by 82
Diplomacy's value: creating security in 1920s Europe and the contemporary Middle East
Rathbun, B. C. (2015) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.190408 · Cited by 81
The role of system identity threat in conspiracy theory endorsement
Federico, C. M., Williams, A. L., & Vitriol, J. A. (2018) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2495 · Cited by 85
“Belief in CTs can provide intuitively plausible, internally consistent, and personally meaningful explanations for the causes of complex, threatening events and changes in the world (e.g., Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Miller, Saunders, & Farhart, 2016; Sunstein, 2014).”
BackgroundChallenging gender stereotypes and advancing inclusive leadership in the operating theatre
Minehart, R. D., Foldy, E. G., Long, J., & Weller, J. M. (2020) · British Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.1016/j.bja.2019.12.015 · Cited by 86
Do you two know each other? Transitivity, homophily, and the need for (network) closure.
Flynn, F. J., Reagans, R. E., & Guillory, L. (2010) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0020961 · Cited by 81
de Zavala, A. G., & Federico, C. M. (2004) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.750 · Cited by 80
“…to intergroup conflict A broader body of research on motivational influences on social perception highlights two tendencies which may lead political actors to prefer aggressive responses to conflict: directional and nondirectional motivations (cf. Kruglanski, 1996; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-uncertainty and group identification: A meta-analysis
Choi, E. U., & Hogg, M. A. (2019) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430219846990 · Cited by 90
“…(e.g., Fromm, 1947), and there are many social psychological analyses of uncertainty and uncertaintyrelated constructs (e.g., Arkin, Oleson, & Carroll, 2010; Festinger, 1954; Kahneman, Slovic, & Tversky, 1982; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; McGregor, Prentice, & Nash, 2009; van den Bos, 2009).”
Panitz, C., Endres, D., Buchholz, M., Khosrowtaj, Z., Sperl, M. F. J., Mueller, E. M., Schubö, A., Schütz, A. C., Teige‐Mocigemba, S., & Pinquart, M. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.726432 · Cited by 86
Block, L., & Williams, P. (2002) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00243.x · Cited by 80
“The Keller and Block (1996) and Kruglanski and Webster (1996) papers together suggest a way”
InfluentialWhy Do People Join Groups? Three Motivational Accounts from Social Psychology
Hogg, M. A., Hohman, Z. P., & Rivera, J. E. (2008) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00099.x · Cited by 80
Weinstock, M. P., Neuman, Y., & Glassner, A. (2006) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.327 · Cited by 80
Molden, D. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2004) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.22.2.248.35461 · Cited by 79
Paradoxical thinking as a new avenue of intervention to promote peace
Hameiri, B., Porat, R., Bar‐Tal, D., Bieler, A., & Halperin, E. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1407055111 · Cited by 80
Kashdan, T. B., McKnight, P. E., Fincham, F. D., & Rose, P. (2010) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00697.x · Cited by 88
Han, P. K. J., Kobrin, S. C., Klein, W. M. P., Davis, W. W., Stefanek, M. E., & Taplin, S. H. (2007) · Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-06-0533 · Cited by 82
“Even if people are truly averse to ambiguity, most either may not perceive it, or may discount its relevance due to several factors, including individual personality differences (55, 56).”
BackgroundKruglanski, A. W. (2013) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691613483477 · Cited by 91
“And a large body of empirical findings attesting to such effects within the context of a unimodel has been reviewed in Kruglanski and Webster (1996), and Kruglanski, Pierro, Mannetti, and DeGrada (2006).”
BackgroundSelf-citationThe Psychology of Judicial Decision Making
(2010) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195367584.001.0001 · Cited by 87
Ideological Asymmetries and the Determinants of Politically Motivated Reasoning
Guay, B., & Johnston, C. D. (2021) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12624 · Cited by 80
The network of conscientiousness
Costantini, G., & Perugini, M. (2016) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2016.10.003 · Cited by 83
Spatola, N., & Wykowska, A. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.106841 · Cited by 83
Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2011) · The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511977244.040 · Cited by 77
The Effect of Brand Commitment on the Evaluation of Nonpreferred Brands: A Disconfirmation Process
Raju, S., Unnava, H. R., & Montgomery, N. V. (2008) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/592816 · Cited by 77
THE MESSENGER BIAS: A RELATIONAL MODEL OF KNOWLEDGE VALUATION
Menon, T., & Blount, S. (2003) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0191-3085(03)25004-8 · Cited by 77
Schulz‐Hardt, S., & Mojzisch, A. (2012) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/10463283.2012.744440 · Cited by 77
“Furthermore, without sufficient epistemic motivation (i.e., a motivation to find the most accurate solution; cf. Kruglanski & Webster, 1996) information exchange in the group may remain superficial and hence insufficient to detect the superiority of the best alternative (Scholten, van Knippenberg,…”
BackgroundThe Third-Person Perception as Social Judgment
Paek, H., Pan, Z., Sun, Y., Abisaid, J. L., & Houden, D. (2005) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650204273760 · Cited by 77
“In other words, cognitive needs pertinent to the tasks of making social judgments (e.g., need for accuracy or congruency of one’s judgments) can also be a strong motivating force, producing what have been called epistemic motivations (Kruglanski & Mayseless, 1990; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996).”
BackgroundCounter-Regulation and Control-Dependency
Rothermund, K. (2011) · Social Psychology · doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000043 · Cited by 83
The Psychological Basis of the Harman-Vogel Paradox
Nagel, J. (2011) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 76
Fong, A. A., Roozenbeek, J., Goldwert, D., Rathje, S., & van der Linden, S. (2021) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430220987596 · Cited by 82
“Need for cognitive closure, which refers to individuals’ desire for definite knowledge on an issue, has been posited to foster conspiratorial thinking when conspiratorial explanations are temporarily salient (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Marchlewska et al., 2017).”
BackgroundNeed for cognitive closure and information search strategy
Choi, J. A., Koo, M., Choi, I., & Auh, S. (2008) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.20253 · Cited by 75
Federico, C. M., & Goren, P. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.003.011 · Cited by 77
Open versus Closed: Personality, Identity, and the Politics of Redistribution
Johnston, C. D., Lavine, H. G., & Federico, C. M. (2017) · Cited by 74
Webster, D. M., Kruglanski, A. W., & Pattison, D. A. (1997) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.72.5.1122 · Cited by 74
Self-citationMotivational Antecedents of Empathy: Inhibiting Effects of Fatigue
Nelson, D. W., Klein, C. T. F., & Irvin, J. E. (2003) · Basic and Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2501_3 · Cited by 73
“This lack of motivation with regard to elaborative information processing may reflect a “need for cognitive closure”—a desire for cognitive clarity or certainty (Kruglanski, 1989; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996).”
BackgroundBroussard, K. A., Warner, R. H., & Pope, A. R. D. (2017) · Sex Roles · doi:10.1007/s11199-017-0823-2 · Cited by 73
The Personality Bases of Ideology: A One-Year Longitudinal Study
Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. H. (2010) · The Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/00224540903365364 · Cited by 73
“These findings are generally consistent with Jost et al. (2003 ), who argued that low Openness to Experience may reflect the epistemic motivation to seize upon the most readily available information and values (likely the most normative information from one's in-group) and then adhere to (or “freeze” upon) such inform…”
ResultIndividual Differences in Argument Scrutiny as Motivated by Need for Cognitive Closure
Klein, C. T. F., & Webster, D. M. (2000) · Basic and Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2202_5 · Cited by 73
“These tendencies may reflect the desire of high need for closure individuals to reach closure urgently and to keep it permanently (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996).”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationPublic involvement: How to encourage citizen participation
Mannarini, T., Fedi, A., & Trippetti, S. (2009) · Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/casp.1030 · Cited by 72
“As for the predicting power of need for cognitive closure, the findings pointed out that variations in the general tendency towards ‘seizing’ and ‘freezing’ information (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996) can influence the decision of taking part in participatory settings.”
Fiedler, K., & Kareev, Y. (2006) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.4.883 · Cited by 75
Cognitive Motivation Correlates of Coping Style in Decisional Conflict
Bouckenooghe, D., Vanderheyden, K., Mestdagh, S., & van Laethem, S. (2007) · The Journal of Psychology · doi:10.3200/jrlp.141.6.605-626 · Cited by 70
Lalwani, A. K. (2009) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/597214 · Cited by 71
“…influences the processing resources available to participants (Gilbert and Osborne 1989; Pontari and Schlenker 2000), whereas the need for closure influences people’s desire to quickly arrive at firm answers that provide epistemic closure (Kardes et al. 2004, 2007; Kruglanski and Webster 1996).”
BackgroundBrannon, L. A., & Brock, T. C. (2001) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1003_2 · Cited by 70
Comparative Advertising: Effects of Structural Alignability on Target Brand Evaluations
Zhang, S., Kardes, F. R., & Cronley, M. L. (2002) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/s1057-7408(16)30082-1 · Cited by 70
Toh, C. A., & Miller, S. R. (2015) · Research in Engineering Design · doi:10.1007/s00163-015-0207-y · Cited by 80
“For example, factors such as preferences for visually complex designs (Onarheim and Christensen 2012), development time (Kruglanski and Webster 1996), organizational culture (Amabile 1996), designer personality traits (Kichuk and Wiesner 1998), and ownership bias (Onarheim and Christensen 2012) can…”
BackgroundIntelligence Failure and Need for Cognitive Closure: On the Psychology of the Yom Kippur Surprise
Bar–Joseph, U., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2003) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/0162-895x.00317 · Cited by 72
Self-citationChen, K., & Cheung, H. L. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.007 · Cited by 82
Opening the Closed Mind: The Effect of Exposure to Literature on the Need for Closure
Djikic, M., Oatley, K., & Moldoveanu, M. (2013) · Creativity Research Journal · doi:10.1080/10400419.2013.783735 · Cited by 69
“It encourages ‘‘seizing’’ on an early statement or proposition in the process of acquiring knowledge, followed by rigidly ‘‘freezing’’ on the seized item, and remaining impervious to additional information (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996, p. 265).”
BackgroundOn the etiology of conflict cultures
Gelfand, M. J., Leslie, L. M., & Keller, K. M. (2008) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.001 · Cited by 76
“Y.J.l. uaaersnzp Leaders with a high need for closure (NFC), who have a strong preference for order and predictability and a discomfort with ambiguity and lack of control (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996), will facilitate the development of conflict avoidant cultures.”
BackgroundThe Epistemic-Teleologic Model of Deliberate Self-Persuasion
Maio, G. R., & Thomas, G. (2007) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868306294589 · Cited by 69
“Prior theory and research have also indicated that people often pursue a desired conclusion while maintaining an “illusion of objectivity” (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Kunda & Oleson, 1995).”
BackgroundCrowson, H. M., DeBacker, T. K., & Thoma, S. J. (2006) · The Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.3200/socp.146.6.733-750 · Cited by 70
Roets, A., Hiel, A. V., Cornelis, I., & Soetens, B. (2008) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167208315554 · Cited by 70
“The Interaction Between Need for Closure and Relative Cognitive Capacity According to Kruglanski and Webster (1996), “relative capacity and motivation are multiplicatively related” (p. 280), suggesting an interaction between relative capacity and NFC.”
BackgroundInfluentialHiggins, E. T. (2000) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/1099-0984(200009/10)14:5 · Cited by 70
Datchary, C., & Licoppe, C. (2007) · Activites · doi:10.4000/activites.1370 · Cited by 65
Motivated Closed-Mindedness and Creativity in Small Groups
Chirumbolo, A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Areni, A., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2005) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/1046496404268535 · Cited by 68
“…unconformity, dissent, and tolerance of opinion deviates, that is, the putative correlates of a low need for closure (De Grada et al., 1999; Kruglanski & Webster, 1991, 1996) facilitate divergent processes in groups and higher group originality (Nemeth, 1995; Nemeth & Nemeth-Brown, 2003;…”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialSelf-citationThe Acheulean Handaxe Technological Persistence: A Case of Preferred Cultural Conservatism?
Finkel, M., & Barkai, R. (2018) · Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society · doi:10.1017/ppr.2018.2 · Cited by 69
“The need for closure (NFC), which reflects an aversion to ambiguity and uncertainty as well as a preference for firm, definitive answers to questions (Kruglanski & Webster 1996).”
BackgroundBinge-watching Serialized Video Content: A Transdisciplinary Review
Merikivi, J., Bragge, J., Scornavacca, E., & Verhagen, T. (2019) · Television & New Media · doi:10.1177/1527476419848578 · Cited by 68
“Completion (or closure), in turn, stresses a desire for any definite knowledge on how the given television show ends (Kruglanski and Webster 1996).”
Backgroundde Zavala, A. G., & Bergh, A. V. (2007) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00591.x · Cited by 67
“…argue that different political beliefs may be driven by the same cognitive motivation and that the need for closure may be seen as a „content free‟ variable that motivates people to seize and freeze (see Kruglanski & Webster, 1996) on whatever ideological context that happens to be available.”
BackgroundEthnic Change, Personality, and Polarization Over Immigration in the American Public
Johnston, C. D., Newman, B. J., & Velez, Y. R. (2015) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfv022 · Cited by 70
Helping a Few a Lot or Many a Little: Political Ideology and Charitable Giving
Farmer, A., Kidwell, B., & Hardesty, D. M. (2020) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1002/jcpy.1164 · Cited by 73
Effects of Ambiguity and Need for Closure on the Acquisition of Information
Hiel, A. V., & Mervielde, I. (2002) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.20.5.380.21124 · Cited by 67
Self-Anchoring in Conversation: Why Language Users Do Not Do What They “Should”
Keysar, B., & Barr, D. J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.010 · Cited by 67
On the Motives Underlying Social Cognition
Dunning, D. A. (2001) · doi:10.1002/9780470998519.ch16 · Cited by 67
Livi, S., Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Kenny, D. A. (2014) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.09.010 · Cited by 66
Self-citationEmotional Experiences and Motivating Factors Associated with Fingerprint Analysis
Charlton, D., Fraser‐Mackenzie, P. A. F., & Dror, I. E. (2010) · Journal of Forensic Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01295.x · Cited by 66
“(19,20) find that participants motivated to avoid closure generate the largest number of hypotheses, in contrast to those motivated for a need for closure who produced the fewest hypotheses.”
BackgroundResult
Metadata
- Authors
- Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Maryland, College Park (US)
- ORCID
- Kruglanski, Arie W.
- Venue
- Psychological Review
- Published
- 1996-04
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 263-283
- ISSN
- 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1471
- OpenAlex
- W1994106556
- Cited by
- 2,379
- References
- 87
- Citations by year
- 2026: 105 · 2025: 104 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 78 · 2022: 110 · 2021: 130 · 2020: 150 · 2019: 96 · 2018: 135 · 2017: 107 · 2016: 98 · 2015: 92 · 2014: 107 · 2013: 88 · 2012: 108
- FWCI
- 80.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r01mh052578-05, 5k05mh001213-03)
- National Institute of Mental Health (1R01 MH 52578, KO5/MH01213)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychology of Social Influence
- Keywords
- need for closure, cognitive closure, impression formation, stereotyping, attribution, persuasion, group decision making, individual differences, social cognition
- MeSH terms
- Cognition, Decision Making, Humans, Intelligence, Language, Personality
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
