Need for Closure and individual tendency for design fixation and functional fixedness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past work explored the use of Kruglanski’s Need for Closure scale to separately predict individual tendency for design fixation and functional fixedness. The Need for Closure scale is a social-psychological individual difference variable that has five subscales: (1) order, (2) predictability, (3) decisiveness, (4) ambiguity, and (5) closed-mindedness. In a past study on design fixation, participants were asked to develop concepts for which an example solution was provided, and correlations were found between participants’ score on the Need for Closure scale and the degree of fixation in their concepts. In a separate study on functional fixedness, participants were asked to identify alternative uses for everyday objects, and correlations were found between measures of functional fixedness and components of Need for Closure. The current work explored whether individual tendency for design fixation and functional fixedness could be related, combining similar methods used in past work. While no significant relationship was found between measures for design fixation and functional fixedness, significant results are related to, and further elucidate past work.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".