False consensus among students of the Open Education College
Abstract
The current research aims to study the level of false consensus among students of the Open Education College, analyzing differences according to gender (male-female). The researcher adopted the descriptive approach, and the research population included students of the Open Education College/Najaf branch during the academic year (2025-2026). The sample was selected using stratified random sampling, and its size was (260) students, with (130) males and (130) females. To achieve the research objectives, the researcher developed a false consensus scale consisting of (28) items distributed across four dimensions: knowledge availability, selective exposure, self-enhancement motivation, and situational ambiguity. The psychometric properties of the scale were confirmed through face validity and construct validity, as well as reliability using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. The results showed that the scale possessed good indicators of validity and reliability. The results also revealed a high level of false consensus among students of the Open Education College, with the mean score of the sample reaching 98.74, which is higher than the hypothetical mean of the scale. Furthermore, the t-test results showed a statistically significant difference. The research findings also revealed statistically significant differences in the level of false consensus based on gender, with the differences favoring females. This reflects that female student are more inclined than males to believe that their opinions, attitudes, and stances are widely accepted or supported by others. In light of these findings, the research recommends the need to enhance students' awareness of cognitive biases, include social cognition topics in the curriculum, develop guidance programs that contribute to the development of critical thinking and acceptance of differing opinions, and conduct future studies that address the relationship between false consensus and other psychological and social variables
References
مجيد، سوسن شاكر، (2010): الاختبارات النفسية ، ط1، دار صفاء للنشر والتوزيع، الاردن .
Aronson, E. (2010). The Social Animal (10th ed.). New York: Worth Publishers.
Chen, X. (2009). Cultural variations in social cognition. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(2), 205–220.
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1984). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 579–589.
Miller, D. T., Monin, B., & Prentice, D. (1990). Pluralistic ignorance and false consensus. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(5), 450–460.
Perkins, H. W. (2003). The Social Norms Approach to Preventing School and College Age Substance Abuse. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 173–220). New York: Academic Press.
Ross, L. (2018). False consensus effect revisited. Social Cognition, 36(1), 15–21.
Smith, E. R. (2013). Social Psychology (4th ed.). New York: Psychology Press.
Stanley, J. (2005). Thinking Politically: Essays in Political Theory. Ox-ford: Oxford University Press.
• Walker, S. (2018). Social media and perception biases. Media Studies Journal, 12(2), 55–70.
Aronson, E. (2010). The Social Animal (10th ed.). New York: Worth Publishers.
Chen, X. (2009). Cultural variations in social cognition. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(2), 205–220.
Miller, D. T., Monin, B., & Prentice, D. (1990). Pluralistic ignorance and false consensus. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(5), 450–460.
Perkins, H. W. (2003). The Social Norms Approach to Preventing School and College Age Substance Abuse. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 173–220). New York: Academic Press.
Walker, S. (2018). Social media and perception biases. Media Studies Journal, 12(2), 55–70.
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610.
Marks, G., & Miller, N. (1987). Ten years of research on the false-consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 102(1), 72–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.102.1.72
Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Jour-nal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(3), 279–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-X
Mullen, B., Atkins, J. L., Champion, D. S., Edwards, C., Hardy, D., Sto-ry, J. E., & Vanderklok, M. (1985). The false consensus effect: A meta-analysis of 115 hypothesis tests. Journal of Experimental Social Psy-chology, 21(3), 262–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(85)90020-4
Nunnally, J.C.(1978): Psychometric theory, 2nd edition, Mc Graw Hill Co, New York.
Stanley, C. & Hopkins, K. (1972): Educational and psychological Meas-urement and Evaluation. New Jersey. Prentice Hill
Anastasi, A. (1982). Psychological testing (5th ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing .
Copyright (c) 2026 Zaid Abbas Naji
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
