Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Wilson and Schooler presented evidence that introspection can diminish the quality of decisions. With some modifications of their procedure, the authors reexamined the mechanisms underlying this effect. Students reported intentions to take college courses based on course descriptions. Participants who reflected on their decision processes showed decreased amounts of processing, suggesting that introspection limited their ability to systematically process information. In contrast, control participants appeared to use heuristic and systematic processing interdependently. Introspection participants generally discriminated less than did control participants between important versus unimportant information. Moreover, introspection participants indicated that they did not weight the information as they should have, countering the possibility that they adapted their strategies to better meet decision context demands. The mechanisms through which introspection affects decision quality are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bettman, J. R. , Johnson, E. J. , Luce, M. F. , & Payne, J. W. (1993). Correlation, conflict, and choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 931-951.

Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.

Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna , J. M. Olson , & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Chaiken, S. , Giner-Sorolla, R. , & Chen, S. (1996). Beyond accuracy: Defense and impression motives in heuristic and systematic information processing. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking motivation and cognition to behavior (pp. 553-578). New York: Guilford.

Chaiken, S. , Liberman, A. , & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). New York: Guilford.

Chaiken, S. , & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 460-473.

Chen, S. , & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford.

Creyer, E. H. , Bettman, J. R. , & Payne, J. W. (1990). The impact of accuracy and effort feedback and goals on adaptive decision behavior. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 1-16.

Fiske, S. (1980). Attention and weight in impression formation: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 889-906.

10.

Linville, P. W. (1982). The complexity-extremity effect and age-based stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 193-211.

11.

Payne, J. W. , Bettman, J. R. , & Johnson, E. J. (1988). Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 534-552.

12.

Petty, R. E. , & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

13.

Wilson, T. D. , & Schooler, J. W. (1991). Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 181-192.

Thinking too Much or too Little? The Effects of Introspection on the Decision-Making Process

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References