Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Contemporary dual-process models of reasoning maintain that there are two types of thinking –intuitive and deliberative –and that low confidence often leads to deliberation. Previous studies examining the confidence -deliberation relationship have been limited by (1) issues of endogeneity and between-subject comparisons, which we address in this study through debias training and (2) measures of confidence that are taken relatively late in the reasoning process, which we address by measuring confidence via real-time eye-tracking. Self-reported and eye-tracked confidence were both negatively related to deliberative thinking. This finding provides new evidence of the timecourse of the confidence -deliberation relationship and reveals that lowered confidence precedes deliberation.

Keywords

Dual process reasoning uncertainty confidence CRT

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Antonakis

Bendahan

Jacquart

Lalive

(2010). On making causal claims: A review and recommendations. Leadership Quarterly, 21(6), 1086–1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.010

Bago

De Neys

(2019). The smart system 1: Evidence for the intuitive nature of correct responding on the bat-and-ball problem. Thinking and Reasoning, 25(3), 257–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1507949

Boissin

Caparos

Raoelison

De Neys

(2021). From bias to sound intuiting: Boosting correct intuitive reasoning. Cognition, 211, 104645. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COGNITION.2021.104645

De Neys

. (2012). Bias and conflict: A case for logical intuitions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(1), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611429354

De Neys

. (2014). Conflict detection, dual processes, and logical intuitions: Some clarifications. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 169–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.854725

De Neys

. (2018). Dual process theory 2.0. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315204550

De Neys

Rossi

Houdé

. (2013). Bats, balls, and substitution sensitivity: Cognitive misers are no happy fools. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 20(2), 269–273. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0384-5

Evans

J. S. B. T.

Stanovich

K. E.

(2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460685

Frederick

(2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732

10.

Gangemi

Bourgeois-Gironde

Mancini

(2015). Feelings of error in reasoning—In search of a phenomenon. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(4), 383–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2014.980755

11.

Glöckner

Herbold

A.-K.

(2011). An eye-tracking study on information processing in risky decisions: Evidence for compensatory strategies based on automatic processes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 24(1), 71–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.684

12.

Hoover

J. D.

Healy

A. F.

(2019). The bat-and-ball problem: Stronger evidence in support of a conscious error process. Decision, 6(4), 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/dec0000107

13.

Isler

Yilmaz

Dogruyol

(2020). Activating reflective thinking with decision justification and debiasing training. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(15), 926–938.

14.

Kahneman

(2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

15.

Pennycook

Fugelsang

J. A.

Koehler

D. J.

(2015). What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cognitive Psychology, 80, 34–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.05.001

16.

Purcell

Z. A.

Howarth

Wastell

C. A.

Roberts

A. J.

Sweller

(2022). Eye tracking and the cognitive reflection test: Evidence for intuitive correct responding and uncertain heuristic responding. Memory and Cognition, 50, 348–365. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-021-01224-8

17.

Purcell

Z. A.

Wastell

C. A.

Sweller

(2021). Domain-specific experience and dual-process thinking. Thinking and Reasoning, 27(2), 239–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2020.1793813

18.

Raoelison

De Neys

(2019). Do we de-bias ourselves? The impact of repeated presentation on the bat-and-ball problem. In. Judgment and Decision Making, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/6AEC3

19.

Rayner

(1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372

20.

Rohrer

J. M.

(2018). Thinking clearly about correlations and causation: Graphical causal models for observational data. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245917745629

21.

Stanovich

K. E.

(2009). What intelligence tests miss: The psychology of rational thought. Yale University Press.

22.

Thompson

V. A.

Morsanyi

(2012). Analytic thinking: Do you feel like it? Mind and Society, 11(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-012-0100-6

23.

Thompson

V. A.

Prowse Turner

J. A.

Pennycook

(2011). Intuition, reason, and metacognition. Cognitive Psychology, 63(3), 107–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.06.001

24.

Thompson

V. A.

Turner

J. A. P.

Pennycook

Ball

L. J.

Brack

Ophir

Ackerman

(2013). The role of answer fluency and perceptual fluency as metacognitive cues for initiating analytic thinking. Cognition, 128(2), 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.09.012

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.22 MB

Eye movements reveal that low confidence precedes deliberation

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material