RWA has been primarily studied in relation to prejudice and beliefs about sociopolitical issues (Harnish, Bridges, & Gump,
2018; Meloen,
2019). However, there has been a recent surge of interest in the underlying cognitive styles that contribute to RWA opinions and behaviors. RWA has been linked to low openness-to-experience and denial of scientific evidence (e.g., climate change denial; Butler,
2000; Häkkinen & Akrami,
2014). A meta-analysis has also shown that RWA ideologies and prejudice are related to lower cognitive reasoning abilities (Onraet et al.,
2015). Recent evidence supports the idea that a closed-minded cognitive style is the strongest predictor of RWA, above and beyond other cognitive styles and social cognition scales (Berggren, Akrami, Bergh, & Ekehammar,
2019). Critically, the foregoing traits are closely related to rigid cognitive styles with high intolerance of ambiguity. Right-wing radicalism and closed-mindedness contribute to binary, black-and-white thinking and ambiguity intolerance (Lauriola, Foschi, & Marchegiani,
2015). Belief updating requires receptivity to contradictory information and a willingness to accept uncertainty. It therefore stands to reason that elements of a closed-minded cognitive style may impair successful belief updating.