Market Sophistication and Metacognition of Workers in Collectivistic vs. Individualistic Countries

• Autorzy: Marcin Brycz , Hanna Brycz
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The study is designed to answer the question of whether and how economic and technological factors of collectivistic vs. individualistic countries relate to metacognition, meaning self-awareness of biases (metacognitive self, MCS). The latter was measured via a questionnaire (MCSQ - 40), translated (back - forth) into Polish, English, Vietnamese, Hindu, and Spanish (n = 945). Economic and technological factors were extracted from the Global Innovation Index dataset. Knowledge workers and market sophistication were chosen as the factors. The former factor when strong in a given country enhanced MCS of participants. Conversely, the latter factor, that is market sophistication, decreased MCS level of participants when significant. The results are explained in terms of Marx's theory, the beneficial role of human technology, and the theories of consciousness. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Individualism; Economics; Technology; Innovative character

PL

Indywidualizm; Ekonomia; Technologia; Innowacyjność

• Czasopismo: Economics & Sociology
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: 15
• Numer: nr 2
• Strony: 125--137

Twórcy

autor

Marcin Brycz

• University of Gdansk, Poland

autor

Hanna Brycz

• University of Gdansk, Poland

Bibliografia

• Åhman, H. (2017), Conceptualizing The Self: A Critical Analysis of The Self As a Discursive Trend In HuHuman-Computernteraction Research, Human Technology,13(2), 149-179.
• Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
• Baumeister, R., F., Vohs, K., D. (2004). Self-regulation. Research, theory, and applications. The Guilford Press: NY.
• Becker, J. C., Hartwich, L., & Haslam, S. A. (2021). Neoliberalism can reduce well-being by promoting a sense of social disconnection, competition, and loneliness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 60(3), 947-965. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12438
• Belk, R. W. (1985). Materialism: Trait aspects of living in the material world. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 265-280. https://doi.org/10.1086/208515
• Bitard, P., Edqust, Ch., Riskne, A., Leif, H., (2008). The paradox of high R&D input and low innovation output: Sweden, Paper no. 2008/14, CIRCLE, Lund University, and Dahmen Institutet.
• Bristol, P., DeMarree, K. G. (eds.). (2012). Social Metacognition. New York: Psychology Press Francis & Taylor Group.
• Brycz, H., & Karasiewicz, K. (2011). Metacognition and self-regulation: The Metacognitive Self Scale. Acta Neuropsychologica Neuropsychological, 9(3), 263-281.
• Brycz, H., Różycka-Tran, J., Szczepanik, J. (2015), Cross-cultural differences in metacognitive self, Economics and Sociology, 8(1), 157-164. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2015/8-1/12
• Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the "planning fallacy": Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 366-381. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.366
• Cialdini, R. (1993). Influence. Science and practice. New York: Harper Collins College Publisher.
• Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO (2017): The Global Innovation Index 2017: Innovation Feeding the World, Ithaca, Fontainebleau, and Geneva.
• Cox, P., Khan, R. H., (2017), Country Culture and National Innovation, Archives of Business Research, 5(2), 85-101. https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.52.2768
• Daoud, J. (2017), Multicollinearity and Regression Analysis, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 949 012009
• Efklides, A. (2008). Metacognition: Defining its facets and levels of functioning about self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychologist, 13, 277-287.
• Efklides, A., Valachopoulos, S. (2012). Measurement of metacognitive knowledge of self, task, and strategies in mathematics. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28, 227-239.
• Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
• Giza, W. & Wilk, B. (2021). Revolution 4.0 and its implications for consumer behaviour. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 9(4), 195-206. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2021.090412
• Goldstein, D. G., & Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Models of ecological rationality: The recognition heuristic. Psychological Review, 109(1), 75-90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.75
• Hayes, A., F. (2013). Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis. A regression-based approach. The Guilford Press: NY, London.
• Jackson, M. C. (2021). Artificial Intelligence & Algorithmic Bias: The Issues With Technology Reflecting History & Humans. Journal of Business & Technology Law, 16(2), 299-316.
• Jankowska, B. Matysek-Jędrych, A. Mroczek-Dąbrowska, K, (2017) Efficiency of national innovation systems: Poland and Bulgaria in the context of the Global Innovation Index, Comparative Economic Research, 20(3), 77-94, https://doi.org/10.1515/cer-2017-0021
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80(4), 273-251. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034747
• Karlsen, J. & Ytre-Arne, B. (2021): Intrusive media and knowledge work: how knowledge workers negotiate digital media norms in the pursuit of focused work, Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1933561
• Kawakami, H., (1926), On Marx's "Forms of Social Consciousness", Kyoto University Economic Review, 1(1), (JULY 1926),
• Khedhaouria, A., Thurik R., (2017), Configurational conditions of national innovation capability: A fuzzy-set analysis approach. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 120 (2017), 48-58, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.04.005
• Koriat, A. (2016). Metacognition: Decision-making processes in self-monitoring and self-regulation. In G. Keren & G. Wu (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 356-379). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Larrik, R. P. (2004). Debiasing. In D. J. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 316-337). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
• Lau, H., & Rosenthal, D. (2011). Empirical support for higher-order theories of conscious awareness. Trends in cognitive sciences, 15(8), 365-373.
• Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U., Seifert, C., & Schwarz, N. (2012). Misinformation and its correction continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in Public Interest, 13(3), 106-131. doi:10.1177/1529/006/245/018
• Maciejewski, M., & Głodowska, A. (2020). Economic development versus the growing importance of the financial sector: Global insight. International Entrepreneurship Review, 6(3), 77-90. https://doi.org/10.15678/IER.2020.0603.06
• MacKinnon, D.P. and Luecken, L.J. (2011), Statistical analysis for identifying mediating variables in public health dentistry interventions. Journal of Public Health Dentistry, 71: S37-S46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-7325.2011.00252.x
• Marx, K., (1859), A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1977, reprinted on: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm
• Murray, A., Rhymer, J., & Sirmon, D. G. (2021). Humans and Technology: Forms of Conjoined Agency in Organizations. Academy of Management Review, 46(3), 552-571. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2019.0186
• Nawaz, N., Gomes, A. M., & Faisal, S. U. (2021). Is the Revolution of Technologies Transforming Human Resources? Journal of Management Information & Decision Sciences, 24(3), 1-10.
• Nelson, T., Narens L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical Framework and new Findings. W: G. H. Bower (red.) The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, (26), 125-173. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. pp. 27-37
• Rosenthal, D. M. (2002). How many kinds of consciousness?. Consciousness and cognition, 11(4), 653-665.
• Rymarczyk, J. (2020). Technologies, Opportunities and Challenges of the Industrial Revolution 4.0: Theoretical Considerations. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 8(1), 185-198. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2020.080110
• Sang-Gun L., Silvana, T., Changsoo, K. (2013), The impact of cultural differences on technology adoption, Journal of World Business 48, 20-29
• Scholer, A. A., Miele, D. B. (2016). The role of meta motivation in creating task-motivation fit. Motivation Science, 2(3), 171-196. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000043
• Schraw, G., Dennison, R. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460-475.
• Schwarz, N. (2015). Metacognition. In: M. Mikelincer, P. R. Shaver (Eds.). APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology: Vol 1. Attitudes and social cognition, (pp. 203-229), APA.
• See, Y. H. M., Petty, R. E., Fabrigar, L. R. (2008). Affective and cognitive meta-bases of attitudes: Unique effects on information interest and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 938-955.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th ed.). New York: Allyn and Bacon theories of conscious awareness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15,
• Timmermann, D. (1995). Human capital theory and the individualization theorem. In G. Neubauer & K. Hurrelmann (Eds.), Individualization in childhood and adolescence. (pp. 223-245). Walter De Gruyter.
• Ulusoy, T., Yasar, E., & Aktan, M. (2019). Impact of industry 40 revolution on science, technology, and society (STS): Challenges and opportunities in the industry 40 era. In H. C. Lum (Ed.), Critical issues impacting Science, Technology, Society (STS), and our future. (pp. 1-20). Information Science Reference/IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7949-6.ch001
• Weiner, B. (1972). Theories of motivation: From mechanism to cognition. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.
• Weiner, B. (2014). An anecdotal history of motivation. Review of Psychology, 57(3), 299-321.
• Whittlesa, B. W. A. (1993). Illusions of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1235-1253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.6.1235
• Williford K. (2020). Headlessness without illusions: Phenomenological undecidability and materialism. Journal of Consciousness Studies. 2020;27(5-6):190-200. Accessed October 5, 2021. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2020-65094-017&lang=pl&site=ehost-live
• Winkielman, P., & Schooler, J. W. (2011). Splitting consciousness: Unconscious, conscious, and metaconscious processes in social cognition. European Review of Social Psychology, 22, 1-35. Consciousness and Cognition, 11, 653-665.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14254/2071-789X.2022/15-2/8