Synonyms

Typical intellectual engagement

Definition

An individual difference variable which describes a person’s desire to engage in cognitively challenging tasks and effortful thinking.

Introduction

The Need for Cognition (NfC) is a psychological construct that concerns an individual’s tendency and enjoyment in seeking, evaluating, and integrating multiple relevant sources of information toward making sense of their surroundings. It captures the extent to which individuals chronically engage in effortful reflection in arriving at an opinion (cognizers; high NfC) or tend to form an opinion based on cursory or superficial aspects (cogmisers; low NfC). This individual differences variable is typically measured with self-report scales. The most commonly used are the long- and short-form Need for Cognition scales (Cacioppo and Petty 1982; Cacioppo et al. 1984), although the Typical Intellectual Engagement scale has been shown to measure a similar construct (Woo et al. 2007; in von Stumm and Ackerman 2013).

Psychometric Properties of NfC Scale

The original 34-item and the short-form 18-item versions of the Need for Cognition scale have both shown high internal consistency reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha often reported above 0.8 in large samples (Cacioppo et al. 1996). Good test-retest reliability and split-half reliability have also been established for the Need for Cognition scale. The scale has been shown over many studies to be a valid measure of the Need for Cognition construct and to have acceptable convergent and discriminant validity (Cacioppo et al. 1996). Small-to-no correlation has been found between the Need for Cognition scale and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability scale, suggesting that respondents tend to answer truthfully, rather than in a manner that makes them seem more interested in thinking in order to impress (Cacioppo et al. 1996). It has been translated into several different languages, including Dutch, French, German, Swedish, Romanian, and Chinese, and has maintained high reliability and validity (e.g., Bors et al. 2006).

Need for Cognition was theorized as a unidimensional construct, and most factor analyses conducted on the Need for Cognition scale have supported a single underlying factor. However, some researchers have found evidence of two or more factors that relate to the directionality of the wording of items (positive vs. negative) and other methodological artifacts. Furnham and Thorne (2013) identified three highly intercorrelated factors (need for cognitive challenge, need for understanding, and enjoyment of extensive thought) in a 34-item scale reworded to all be positive, and Tanaka and colleagues (1988) also found three factors (cognitive persistence, cognitive complexity, and cognitive confidence) using the 34-item scale and a dichotomous yes/no response scale (in Cacioppo et al. 1996).

Soubelet and Salthouse (2016) investigated the applicability of the 18-item scale across the lifespan with over 5,000 respondents between ages 18 and 99. They report that this scale taps a “broad construct that could reflect motivation to seek out intellectual challenge” (p. 1) and that it is valid over the range of ages studied. Finally, numerous studies have shown that both the 18-item and original 34-item instruments are gender indiscriminate (Cacioppo et al. 1996).

Outcome Versus Process

Because the level of NfC is proportional to the typical amount of cogitation and self-awareness used in assessing a wide variety of topics rather than the outcome of these processes, it is not always possible to predict the eventual stance or opinion of an individual based on NfC. Individuals anywhere on the scale can manifest faulty judgment or biased decisions though those high (vs. low) in NfC are more likely to correct for biases should they become aware of them. In addition, framing the issue at hand in too simplistic of a manner or removing the motivation to think can result in disincentivizing high NfC individuals to think deeply or enjoy effortful thinking. Similarly, low NfC people can show high NfC characteristics when the issue is of high personal significance, is consistent with their own self-image, or when it is presented in an engaging manner (Petty et al. 2009). That said, high NfC is associated with many positive outcomes such as more effective study habits, increased critical thinking, better academic outcomes, and resistance to misconceptions about psychology (e.g., Hughes et al. 2015; Petty et al. 2009). Note that the intercorrelations among these variables suggest multiple determinants of the outcomes, but in many cases, NfC accounts for significant variance when other effects are removed statistically. In addition, NfC has been shown to mediate and to be mediated by several of these factors (e.g., Furnham and Thorne 2013). In general, high NfC is associated with a greater consistency between belief and action and with greater confidence in decisions.

Personality Correlates

NfC has been shown to be moderately positively correlated with general intelligence as well as both fluid and crystallized intelligence and general knowledge (von Stumm and Ackerman 2013). It does not appear, however, to be related to working memory (Hill et al. 2013). Despite the robustness of the relationship between NfC and intelligence, some researchers have argued that the observed correlations with verbal intelligence are in fact merely artifacts of the mental energy required to understand and respond to the negatively worded items on the scale (e.g., Bors et al. 2006). However, the finding that NfC is positively associated with varying measures of academic performance has remained robust. Due to the nature of the available analyses, it is not possible to know whether individuals who are high in NfC are therefore more motivated to do well in school or if academic performance instead rewards and leads to increased enjoyment of cognition.

Numerous studies have also shown that NfC is positively correlated with the personality trait openness to experience (e.g., Soubelet and Salthouse 2016). Results of studies attempting to determine the relationship of NfC to other personality traits as set out in the five factor model have been mixed; however NfC does appear to be related to lower levels of neuroticism (Cacioppo et al. 1996).

Conclusion

NfC is a stable individual differences variable that assesses a person’s desire to engage in effortful thinking and cognitive challenges. Although NfC only assesses desire and not aptitude, it has been associated with academic performance and both fluid and crystallized intelligence. Cognizers seek out experiences that allow them to think and process information deeply and tend to make decisions based on facts rather than on mental shortcuts, although cogmisers can also be motivated to think more effortfully given certain conditions.

Cross-References