You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
We explore linguistic and behavioral features of dogmatism in social media and construct statistical models that can identify dogmatic comments. Our model is based on a corpus of Reddit posts, collected across a diverse set of conversational topics and annotated via paid crowdsourcing. We operationalize key aspects of dogmatism described by existing psychology theories (such as over-confidence), finding they have predictive power. We also find evidence for new signals of dogmatism, such as the tendency of dogmatic posts to refrain from signaling cognitive processes. When we use our predictive model to analyze millions of other Reddit posts, we find evidence that suggests dogmatism is a deeper personality trait, present for dogmatic users across many different domains, and that users who engage on dogmatic comments tend to show increases in dogmatic posts themselves.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: 

[2]: The author addressed the construct validity of B. Altemeyer's (1996) Dogmatism (DOG) scale. Confirmatory factor analyses of the scale provided evidence of uni-dimensionality, despite apparent method effects related to item wording. DOG scale scores correlated strongly and positively with the belief that knowledge is certain, providing convergent validity evidence for the measure. Scores on the DOG scale appeared empirically distinguishable from measures of need for cognition, need for structure, and need to evaluate. Criterion-related validity evidence came in the form of theoretically predictable relationships between the DOG scale and measures of religious fundamentalism, quest orientation, national identification, conservative ideology, dangerous world beliefs, and reactions to individuals and groups who hold worldview-incongruent beliefs and values.

[3]: Dogmatism represents an individual difference in cognitive style characterized by closed-mindedness. The concept of dogmatism has received a great deal of research attention in such topics as information selection, information processing, message selection, and source-message distinction. Previous dogmatism scales, however, have psychometric problems, and item wordings have become outdated. The present study updates the scale items based on a simplified conceptualization of dogmatism and assesses the validity of the new scale. Factor analyses and item analyses were employed to assess the unidimensionality of the scale. Two validation studies (N = 165 for study 1; N = 175 for study 2) were conducted. Both studies provided evidence consistent with construct validity. The updated dogmatism correlated positively with dominance and submission and negatively with perspective-taking and empathic concern. The predictive validity of the scale was only partially consistent with the data.
In contrast to the computational models we have presented, dogmatism is usually measured in psychology through survey scales, in which study participants answer questions designed to reveal underlying personality attributes [1] . Over time, these surveys have been updated [3] and improved to meet standards of psychometric validity [2] .