Jump to content

User:RationalAndOptimistic/sandbox: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Tag: Reverted
←Replaced content with '{{Userspace draft|date=October 2021}} {{NOINDEX|visible=yes}} {{User sandbox}} <!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->'
 
Line 3: Line 3:
{{User sandbox}}
{{User sandbox}}
<!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Short description|Recognition of the limits of your knowledge and awareness of your fallibility}}
'''Intellectual humility''' is a metacognitive process characterized by recognizing the limits of one's knowledge and acknowledging one's fallibility. It involves several components, including not thinking too highly of oneself, refraining from believing one's own views are superior to others', lacking intellecual vanity, being open to new ideas, and acknowledging mistakes and shortcomings. It is positively associated with openness to new ideas, empathy, prosocial values, tolerance for diverse perspectives, and scrutiny of misinformation. Individuals with higher levels of intellectual humility experience benefits such as improved decision-making, positive social interactions, and the moderation of conflicts. There is a long history of philosophers considering the importance of intellectual humility as a 'virtue'. The modern study of this phenomenon began in the mid-2000s.

==Definition==
Intellectual humility is a psychological process, a [[Metacognition|metacognitive]] entity, defined as "the recognition of the limits of one’s knowledge and an awareness of one’s fallibility."<ref name="Costello 2023">{{cite web |last1=Costello |first1=T. H. |last2=Newton |first2=C. |last3=Lin |first3=H. |last4=Pennycook |first4=G. |title=Metacognitive Blindspot in Intellectual Humility Measures. |url=https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/gux95 |website=PsyArXiv Preprints |publisher=Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS) and the Center for Open Science (COS) |access-date=18 February 2024 |date=6 August 2023}}</ref>

==Components==
Intellectual humility is "a multifaceted and multilayered virtue"<ref name="Hannon 2020">{{cite book |last=Hannon |first=Michael |date=July 20, 2020 |editor1-last=Tanesini |editor1-first=Alessandra |editor2-last=Lynch |editor2-first=Michael |title=Polarisation, Arrogance, and Dogmatism: Philosophical Perspectives|publisher=Routledge |pages=104-119 |chapter=Chapter 7: Intellectual humility and the curse of knowledge |isbn=0367260859 |url=https://www.academia.edu/97867017/Intellectual_humility_and_the_curse_of_knowledge |access-date=18 February 2024}}</ref> which involves several key components that shape an individual's intellectual disposition. An intellectually humbler person will:
*Not think too highly of themselves
*Not think that one’s beliefs or attitudes are better or more correct than other viewpoints
*Will lack intellectual vanity
*Not boast or brag about their intellectual accomplishments
*Not be defensive when challenged or try to explain away their intellectual shortcomings
*Take complaints and criticism seriously
*Acknowledge their mistakes and shortcomings
*Show open-mindedness to new ideas
*“Own” their intellectual limitations<ref name="Hannon 2020" />

It is positively associated with:
*Openness to new ideas
*Empathy
*Prosocial values
*Tolerance for diverse people and perspectives; and *Scrutiny of misinformation
* Greater openness to learning about different political views, lower affective polarization, and higher religious tolerance<ref name="Welker 2023">{{cite journal |last1=Welker |first1=Keith M. |last2=Duong |first2=Mylien |last3=Rakhshani |first3=Andrew |last4=Dieffenbach |first4=Macrina |last5=Coleman |first5=Peter |last6=Peter |first6=Jonathan |title=The Online Educational Program ‘Perspectives’ Improves Affective Polarization, Intellectual Humility, and Conflict Management |journal=Journal of Social and Political Psychology |date=2023-06-15 |volume=11 |issue=2 |page=439 |url=https://constructivedialogue.org/assets/10651-Article-102975-1-10-20230821.pdf |access-date=19 February 2024 |ref=Welker 2023}}</ref>

==Benefits==
There are a variety of benefits to individuals who have higher intellectual humility including:

*Improved Decision-Making: "more likely to process information in ways that enhance their knowledge and understanding than people lower in intellectual humility."
*Positive interactions: "more positive social interactions, especially when disagreements arise . .. . people who are more intellectually humble to be liked better than those low in IH.<ref name="Leary 2022">{{cite journal |last1=Leary |first1=M.R. |title=Intellectual Humility as a Route to More Accurate Knowledge, Better Decisions, and Less Conflict |journal=. American Journal of Health Promotion |date=2022 |volume=36 |issue=8 |pages=1401-1404 |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08901171221125326b |access-date=19 February 2024 |ref=Leary 2022}}</ref>

At a social level there are also benefits including the moderation of conflicts and may lead to greater compromise.<ref name="Leary 2022" />

The consequences of the reverse - i.e. [[overconfidence effect|overconfidence]] - can be problematic. As social psychologist Scott Plous wrote, "No problem in judgement and decision making is more prevalent and more potentially catastrophic than overconfidence."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Plous |first1=Scott |title=The psychology of judgement and decision making |date=1993 |publisher=McGraw-Hill Education |isbn=0070504776 |page=217 |edition=1st}}</ref> It has been blamed for lawsuits, strikes, wars, poor corporate acquisitions,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Malmendier |first1=Ulrike |last2=Tate |first2=Geoffrey |title=Who makes acquisitions? CEO overconfidence and the market's reaction |journal=[[Journal of Financial Economics]] |date=2008 |volume=89 |issue=1 |pages=20–43 |url=https://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeejfinec/v_3a89_3ay_3a2008_3ai_3a1_3ap_3a20-43.htm|doi=10.1016/j.jfineco.2007.07.002 |s2cid=12354773 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Twardawski |first1=Torsten |last2=Kind |first2=Axel |title=Board overconfidence in mergers and acquisitions |journal=[[Journal of Business Research]] |date=2023 |volume=165 |issue=1 |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296323003843|doi=10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114026}}</ref> and stock market bubbles and crashes.

A large study of nearly 50,000 participants from over 68 countries the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (April-May 2020) found that "open-mindedness turns out to be the strongest predictor for rejecting [[conspiracy theory|conspiracy beliefs]]" (and support for public health measures) related to COVID-19.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pärnamets |first1=Philip |last2=Alfano |first2=Mark |last3=Van Bavel |first3=Jay |last4=Ross |first4=Robert |title=Open-mindedness predicts support for public health measures and disbelief in conspiracy theories during the COVID-19 pandemic |journal=PsyArXiv |date=22 July 2022 |url=https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/2ujra |access-date=20 February 2024}}</ref>

==Learning Intellectual Humility==
A study found that users of an online tool could experience small- to medium-sized increase in their intellectual humility.<ref name="Welker 2023" />

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Activities with some empirical support and/or theoretical foundation for increasing intellectual humility<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Krumrei-Mancuso |first1=Elizabeth |last2=Rice Begin |first2=Malika |journal=American Journal of Health Promotion |date=October 28, 2022 |title="Cultivating Intellectual Humility in Leaders: Potential Benefits, Risks, and Practical Tools"|volume=36 |issue=8 |url=https://doi.org/10.1177/08901171221125326}}</ref>
|-
! Exercise with rationale !! Sample applications
|-
| Reason about a challenging situation from a third-person rather than a first-person perspective. Thinking about a situation from a third-person perspective creates psychological distance, which increases objectivity about the situation. It also shifts people from an individual to a relational focus. ||
*Journal about a challenging interpersonal situation from the vantage point of an outside observer. Possible writing prompt: “Think about a challenging interpersonal exchange. Pretend an uninvolved person observed the interaction. Write down everything the uninvolved person would have seen and heard from his or her perspective.”
*Ask team members who are experiencing an intellectual disagreement to engage in a 180-degree role play in which they have a discussion arguing only from the other person’s perspectives (provide name tags with the other person’s name to add effect). Although different from a third-person perspective, this exercise often leads to greater understanding of another person’s viewpoint
|-
|Shift toward a growth mindset of intelligence: the belief that intelligence can be developed and grow rather than that it is a trait that cannot be changed. People who hold a growth mindset of intelligence may feel less threatened to acknowledge what they don't yet understand and feel more comfortable acknowledging the intellectual strengths of others.
||
*Read an article or chapter about the growth mindset of intelligence, such as Dweck & Yeager.30
*Create shared learning opportunities with longer readings, such as Dweck,31 where team members each review one chapter and share a 5x5 (5 minutes, 5 slides) presentation with the team about the key points of the chapter.
|-
|Critically evaluate the limitations of one’s knowledge on a particular topic or in a particular situation.32 When people assess the limits of their knowledge in a particular situation or on a particular topic it can make their general intellectual humility more salient in the moment, on the topic in question. ||
*Critically evaluate for yourself: Could your views on the topic turn out to be wrong? Could you be overlooking evidence on the topic? Could your views on the topic change if you were given additional evidence or information?33
|-
| Identify previous examples where acknowledging flaws in one’s thinking or ideas resulted in positive change. Thinking about practical examples of intellectual humility brings this concept out of the theoretical to promote applied understanding. This exercise can minimize fears about intellectual humility by highlighting the ways in which intellectual humility has resulted in positive outcomes for a person in the past.
||
*Identify views or policies you held in the past that you have since changed. Consider views and policies that were supported by reason at the time, but that you came to reject as false or unhelpful.
|-
| Recognize general human intellectual fallibility.36 Acknowledging that all humans have intellectual fallibility can help people realize they are no exception. This allows people to embrace intellectual humility as an aspect of their shared humanity and may help leaders accept their own and their followers’ intellectual fallibility.
||
*Learn about humans’ cognitive biases
|}

==History==
For millennia, philosophers have championed "a recognition of one's epistemic limit" and have named it an epistemic virtue.<ref name="Costello 2023" />

Perhaps the first recorded instance of intellectual humility is when [[Socrates]] (in [[Apology (Xenophon)|The Apology]]) remarked: “Although I do not suppose that either of us knows anything really beautiful and good, I am better off than he is – for he knows nothing, and thinks he knows. I neither know nor think I know.”<ref name="Costello 2023" />

Waclaw Bąk ''et al.'' identify Socrates as "the ideal example" of intellectual humility. Studies by [[Abraham Maslow]], [[Carl Rogers]], and [[Gordon Allport]] discuss [[humility]] with regard to one's knowledge without using the phrase "intellectual humility.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bąk |first1=Wacław |last2=Wójtowicz |first2=Bartosz |last3=Kutnik |first3=Jan |date=2022 |title=Intellectual humility: an old problem in a new psychological perspective |journal=Current Issues in Personality Psychology |volume=10 |issue=2 |pages=85–97 |doi=10.5114/cipp.2021.106999 |s2cid=237964643 |issn=2353-4192|doi-access=free |pmc=10535625 }}</ref>

Notwithstanding this long history, attention from social and behavioural scientists is much more recent - roughly starting in the mid-2000s.<ref name="Hannon 2020">{{cite book |last1=Hoyle |first1=Rick |date=July 20, 2023 |editor1-last=Ottati |editor1-first=Victor |editor2-last=Stern |editor2-first=Chadly |title= Open-Mindedness and Dogmatism in a Polarized World|publisher=Oxford University Press |pages=101-119 |chapter=Chapter 6: Forms of Intellectual Humility and Their Associations with Features of KNowledge, Beliefs, and Opinions|isbn=0197655467 |url=https://books.google.ca/books?id=t_PBEAAAQBAJ&lpg=PA101&ots=Y2IZDqQoCB&dq=%22benefits%20of%20intellectual%20humility%22&lr&pg=PA101#v=onepage&q=%22benefits%20of%20intellectual%20humility%22&f=false |access-date=19 February 2024}}</ref> One of the first focused studies of intellectual humility was conducted by Roberts and Woods in 2003.<ref>{{Cite thesis|degree=PhD |last=Haggard |first=Megan C. |date=December 2016 |title=Humility as Intellectual Virtue: Assessment and Uses of a Limitations-Owning Perspective of Intellectual Humility |url=https://baylor-ir.tdl.org/bitstream/handle/2104/9925/HAGGARD-DISSERTATION-2016.pdf?sequence=1 |website=Baylor University |page=2}}</ref>

== See also ==
* {{annotated link|[[Open-mindedness]]}}
* {{annotated link|[[Skepticism]]}}
* {{annotated link|[[Conspiracy theory]]}}
* {{annotated link|[[Metacognition]]}}
* {{annotated link|[[Curiosity]]}}
* {{annotated link|[[Humility]]}}
* [[Intellectual courage]] - Quality of willingness to critically analyze one's own strongly held beliefs and conclusions

== Further reading ==
*{{cite web| date = 24 Jan 2024 | title = Can Intellectual Humility Save Us from Ourselves? | url = https://daily.jstor.org/can-intellectual-humility-save-us-from-ourselves/ | website = JSTOR DAILY | publisher = [[JSTOR]] }} Seven conversations "pairing scholars of intellectual humility with community leaders to explore manifestations of intellectual humility outside the academy."
*{{Cite web |last=Resnick |first=Brian |date=2019 |title=Intellectual humility: the importance of knowing you might be wrong |url=https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/1/4/17989224/intellectual-humility-explained-psychology-replication |access-date= |website=Vox}}
*{{cite web|last=Dolan|first=Eric|year=2019|url=https://www.psypost.org/2019/03/intellectually-humble-people-tend-to-possess-more-knowledge-study-finds-53409|title=Intellectually humble people tend to possess more knowledge, study finds|website=PsyPost}}
* {{cite book |last=Aberdein |first=Andrew |chapter=Intellectual Humility and Argumentation |date=2020 |url=https://philarchive.org/rec/ABEIHA |title=The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Humility |pages=325–334 |editor-last=Alfano |editor-first=Mark |publisher=Routledge |quote=Paul is the only theorist in Ritchhart’s survey to propose intellectual humility as a critical thinking disposition |access-date=2022-06-04 |editor2-last=Lynch |editor2-first=Michael |editor3-last=Tanesini |editor3-first=Alessandra}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Church |first1=Ian |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RG8wDQAAQBAJ |title=Intellectual Humility: An Introduction to the Philosophy and Science |last2=Samuelson |first2=Peter |date=2016 |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |isbn=978-1-4742-3675-1}}
* {{Cite book |last=Paul |first=Richard |url= |title=Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs to Survive in a Rapidly Changing World |date=1990 |publisher=Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique, Sonoma State University |isbn=0944583040 |pages=54, 194 |lccn=90-80195}}
* {{Cite book |last=Snow |first=Nancy E. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bkBvDwAAQBAJ |title=The Routledge Handbook of Virtue Epistemology |date=2018 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-49528-4 |editor-last=Battaly |editor-first=Heather |language=en |chapter=15. Intellectual Humility}}

==References==
[[Category:Cognitive biases]]
[[Category:Memory biases]]
[[Category:Virtue]]
[[Category:Intellectualism]]
[[Category:Humility]]
[[Category:Cognition]]
[[Category:Cognitive science]]
[[Category:Cognition]]
[[Category:Decision-making]]

Latest revision as of 19:43, 24 February 2024

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:RationalAndOptimistic/sandbox&oldid=1210052076"