A Structural Model of Existential Certainty and Relativistic Beliefs Predicting Peer Competence of Stimulant Users

We tend to make judgments of our peers in many ways, including their level of competence, and we are more likely to interact with those who we have judged as competent (Fiske, 2007). Such judgments may partly be affected by cognitive factors within us, such as our internal control or our quest for knowledge, and it is possible that our judgments might also be attenuated by the extent to which we believe that absolute truth and morality is subjective (Forsyth, 1980). The present study hypothesized a structural model to evaluate the above ideas. The outcome variable of judged peer competency was a measured variable using the competency scale. Cognitive factors was the latent predictor variable indicated by need for cognition, symbolic immortality, and internalized control. Holding relativistic beliefs was the measured mediator variable based on the relativism subscale. Inventories were completed by 193 undergraduate at California State University, Sacramento students. The chi-square value for model fit was not statistically significant, 8.105 (4, N = 193), p = .08, and most of the other indexes also suggested a good fit: GFI = .98, NFI = .93, CFI = .96, RMSEA = .07. Of the three paths, only two were statistically significant. The path from abstract definitions to perceptions of peer competence was not significant, but the paths from our cognitive factor to relativistic beliefs (path coefficient = -.18) and the path from relativistic beliefs to perceptions of peer competence (path coefficient = .18) were each significant, with approximately 18% of the variance in perceptions of peer competence explained. Because the direct path path from our cognitive factor to perceptions of peer competency was not significant in the mediated model, there was the possibility that mediation might have been obtained. We evaluated that by evaluating the unmediated model. However, in the unmediated model the direct path from the cognitive factor to perceptions of peer competency was not statistically significant (path coefficient = -.03). It therefore appears that our cognitive factor was not directly related to perceived peer competency, but did act through relativistic beliefs in affecting judged peer competence.