No evidence was found for convergent validity of three measures of cognitive complexity administered to 39 Ss. While males scored higher on a measure of complexity based on structural relations between constructs, females showed a tendency for higher scores on measures involving verbal differentiation. The relation of complexity to affective orientation is discussed by reference to the concept of specialization.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BannisterD.MairJ. M. M.The evaluation of personal constructs. London: Academic Press, 1968.
2.
BieriJ.BlackerE.The generality of cognitive complexity in the perception of people and inkblots. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956, 53, 112–117.
3.
CrockettW. H.Cognitive complexity and impression formation. In MaherB. A. (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research. Vol. II. New York: Academic Press, 1965. Pp. 47–90.
4.
CrockettW. H.PressA. N.GonyeaA. H.Affective stimulus value, discrimination among others, and measures of cognitive complexity. Paper presented at meeting of Eastern Psychological Association, April, 1968.
IrwinM.TripodiT.BieriJ.Affective stimulus value and cognitive complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 5, 444–448.
7.
LittleB. R.Factors affecting the use of psychological vs. non-psychological constructs on the Rep Test. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 1968, 21, 34. (Abstract) (a)
8.
LittleB. R.Psychospecialization: Functions of differential interest in persons and things. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 1968, 21, 113. (Abstract) (b)
9.
TripodiT.BieriJ.Cognitive complexity as a function of own and provided constructs. Psychological Reports, 1963, 13, 26.
10.
VannoyJ. S.Generality of cognitive complexity-simplicity as a personality construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, 2, 385–396.
