A Power Test of Conceptual Complexity: Textual Correlates1

Conceptual complexity is a personality characteristic that involves the individual's ability to differentiate and integrate aspects of information. It is usu ally measured with the Paragraph Completion Test (PCT), which requires the completion of six paragraphs, in response to standard stems, often with a time limit of 100-120 sec each. In order to eliminate time pressure, which may reduce complexity, the current study evaluated a revised format that used only two stems but allowed 8 minutes per response. As expected, this procedure resulted in higher scores and produced enough written output to allow analysis of particular test components. Complexity scores from 277 university students were related to total number of words written, sentence length, and number of words with more than three syllables, but not to standard formulae designed to measure readability, such as the Flesch, SMOG and FOG indices. The modest size of the obtained correlations suggests that the scoring of conceptual complexity on the basis of semantic content cannot be replaced by indices based on linguistic and textual components.     

Intuitive Perceptions of Decision-making Strategy: Naive Assessors' Concepts of Integrative Complexity

Although there are measurable differences in integrative complexity among solutions that individuals generate in dealing with problems, it is uncertain to what extent people comprehend, recognize, and have preferences among different levels of complexity. Integrative complexity is a function of differentiation (the perception of several attributes within, or perspectives about, a topic) and integration (combining the differentiated characteristics in an interactive or synthesizing solution). The current paper reports two experiments dealing with how university students perceive, interpret, and choose among solutions differing in complexity. Experiment 1 showed that subjects accurately rated the complexity of described solutions differing along the continuum, but that their assessment of their own responses differed from the results of expert scoring. Their self-estimated complexity was highly correlated with their preferences, and preferred complexity was reliably higher than either expert- or self-assessed complexity of subject-generated solutions. Subjects were able to hypothesize quite accurately about environmental and endogenous factors likely to affect complexity. Experiment 2 found that in response to problem scenarios, solutions selected as being potentially most effective were consistently more complex than solutions that participants considered themselves most likely to use. The idea of complexity seems to be intuitively recognizable and understandable by untrained subjects: They can and do distinguish among problem solutions (self-generated or presented) that vary on that dimension, and are able to assess accurately the effects of relevant variables. Such subjects also share the bias shown by experts in favour of the superiority of more complex approaches.     

Frequency of Exposure and Evaluation of Candidates and Campaign Speeches1

Three slides, each showing the photograph of a college-age male, were shown either 5, 10, or 25 times to a total of 95 students (S s). After the presentation, the slides, plus a fourth not previously shown, were presented as photographs of candidates in a campus election, each being paired with a campaign speech. Three speeches consisted of bland platitudes, whereas the fourth argued in favor of a large tuition increase. Ratings of the speeches and the candidates indicated that subjects were accurate in ranking the relative frequency of exposure of the four slides and that the controversial speech elicited less agreement and less favorable ratings than the three other messages. There were U-shaped curvilinear effects of exposure on S s' agreement with the messages, and with ratings of the persuasiveness of the message. Neither exposure nor speech effects were found in ratings of the candidates themselves. Implications of these findings for the frequency of exposure hypothesis (Zajonc, 1968) and for political campaigns are discussed.