Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Analytic thinking: do you feel like it?

  • Published:
Mind & Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A major challenge for Dual Process Theories of reasoning is to predict the circumstances under which intuitive answers reached on the basis of Type 1 processing are kept or discarded in favour of analytic, Type 2 processing (Thompson 2009). We propose that a key determinant of the probability that Type 2 processes intervene is the affective response that accompanies Type 1 processing. This affective response arises from the fluency with which the initial answer is produced, such that fluently produced answers give rise to a strong feeling of rightness. This feeling of rightness, in turn, determines the extent and probability with which Type 2 processes will be engaged. Because many of the intuitions produced by Type 1 processes are fluent, it is common for them to be accompanied by a strong sense of rightness. However, because fluency is poorly calibrated to objective difficulty, confidently held intuitions may form the basis of poor quality decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For this reason, we suggest that Stanovich’s (2011) definition of Type 1 processes may be most useful. This definition relies on autonomy as the central characteristic of Type 1 processes; that is, Type 1 processing is mandatory when the relevant triggering stimuli have been encountered. The other elements described above, namely rapid execution, low cognitive load, parallel processing, are correlated with mandatory processing, but are not defining characteristics of Type 1 processing. Consequently, Type 1 processes may vary in terms of the speed with which they are produced, with concomitant variance in the strength of their FOR.

References

  • Alter AL, Oppenheimer DM (2006) Predicting short-term stock fluctuations by using processing fluency. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:9369–9372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th edn. Author, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin AS, Bjork RA, Schwartz BL (1998) The mismeasure of memory: when retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. J Exp Psychol Gen 127:55–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bless H, Bohner G, Schwarz N, Strack F (1990) Mood and persuasion: a cognitive response analysis. Pers Soc Psychol B 16:331–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burton RA (2008) On being certain: believing you are right even when you’re not. St. Martin’s Griffin, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo JT, Petty RE, Losch ME, Kim HS (1986) Electromyographic activity over facial muscle regions can differentiate the valence and intensity of affective reactions. J Pers Soc Psychol 50:260–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costermans J, Lories G, Ansay C (1992) Confidence level and feeling of knowing in question answering: the weight of inferential processes. J Exp Psychol Learn 18:142–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson D (1995) The representativeness heuristic and the conjunction fallacy effect in children’s decision making. Merrill Palmer Q 41:328–346

    Google Scholar 

  • De Neys W, Cromheeke K, Osman M (2011) Biased but in doubt: conflict and decision confidence. PloS One 6(1):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky J, Bjork RA (eds) (2008) Handbook of metamemory and memory. Psychology Press, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery CF, Blumenthal JA (1991) Effects of physical exercise on psychological and cognitive functioning in older adults. Ann Behav Med 13:99–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein S (2010) Demystifying intuition: what it is, what it does, and how it does it. Psychol Inq 21:295–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans JSBT (2010) Intuition and reasoning: a dual-process perspective. Psychol Inq 21:313–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick S (2005) Cognitive reflection and decision making. J Econ Perspect 19:25–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagnon L, Peretz I (2003) Mode and tempo relative contributions to “happy-sad” judgments in equitone melodies. Cogn Emot 17:25–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gärling T, Kirchler E, Lewis A, van Raaij F (2009). Psychology, financial decision making, and financial crises. Psychol Sci Public Interest 10(1):1–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Greifeneder R, Bless H (2007) Relying on accessible content versus accessibility experiences: the case of processing capacity. Soc Cogn 25:853–881

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidt J (2001) The emotional dog and it’s rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychol Rev 108:814–834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidt J (2008) Morality. Perspect Psychol Sci 3:65–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen J, Dechene A, Wanke M (2008) Discrepant fluency increases subjective truth. J Exp Soc Psychol 44:687–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertwig R, Gigerenzer G (1999) The “conjunction fallacy” revisited: how intelligent inferences look like reasoning errors. J Behav Decis Mak 12:275–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertwig R, Herzog SM, Schooler LJ, Reimer T (2008) Fluency heuristic: a model of how the mind exploits a by-product of information retrieval. J Exp Psychol Learn 34:1191–1206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins ET (1998) The aboutness principle: a pervasive influence on human inference. Soc Cogn 16:173–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth R (2010) Intuition: a challenge for psychological research on decision making. Psychol Inq 21:338–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs JE, Potenza M (1991) The use of judgment heuristics to make social and object decision: a developmental perspective. Child Dev 62:166–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby LL, Kelley CM, Dywan J (1989) Memory attributions. In: Roediger HL III, Craik FIM (eds) Varieties of memory and consciousness: essays in honour of Endel Tulving. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 391–422

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D (2003) A perspective on judgement and choice: mapping bounded rationality. Am Psychol 58:697–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley CM, Lindsay SD (1993) Remembering mistaken for knowing: ease of retrieval as a basis for confidence in answers to general knowledge questions. J Mem Lang 32:1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klaczynski PA (2009) Cognitive and social cognitive development: dual-process research and theory. In: Evans JBST, Frankish K (eds) In two minds: psychological and philosophical theories of dual processing. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 265–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Koriat A (2007) Metacognition and consciousness. In: Zelazo PD, Moscovitch M, Thompson E (eds) The Cambridge handbook of consciousness. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, NY, pp 289–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Koriat A, Ackerman R (2010) Choice latency as a cue for children’s subjective confidence in the correctness of their answer. Dev Sci 13:441–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruger J, Dunning D (1999) Unskilled and aware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. J Pers Soc Psychol 77:1121–1134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer J (2009) How we decide. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Manktelow K, Evans JS (1979) Facilitation of reasoning by realism: effect of non-effect? Br J Psychol 70:477–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoni G, Cornoldi C (1993) Strategies in study time allocation: why is study time sometimes not effective? J Exp Psychol Gen 122:47–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morsanyi K, Handley SJ (2008) How smart do you need to be to get it wrong? The role of cognitive capacity in the development of heuristic-based judgment. J Exp Child Psychol 99:18–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morsanyi K, Handley SJ (2012) Logic feels so good—I like it! Evidence for intuitive detection of logicality in syllogistic reasoning. J Exp Psychol Learn (in press)

  • Nelson TO (1993) Judgments of learning and the allocation of study time. J Exp Psychol Gen 122:269–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer DM (2004) Spontaneous discounting of availability in frequency judgment tasks. Psychol Sci 15:100–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer DM, Frank MF (2008) A rose in any other font would not smell as sweet: effects of perceptual fluency on categorization. Cognition 106:1178–1194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacini R, Epstein S (1999) The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon. J Pers Soc Psychol 76:972–987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plessner H, Betsch C, Betsch T (2008) Intuition in judgement and decision making. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Podbregar M, Voga G, Krivec B, Skale R, Pareznik R, Gabrscek L (2001) Should we confirm our clinical diagnostic certainty by autopsies? Intensive Care Med 27:1750–1755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pronin E, Wegner DM (2006) Manic thinking: independent effects of thought speed and thought content on mood. Psychol Sci 17:807–813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prowse Turner JA, Thompson VA (2009) The role of training, alternative models, and logical necessity in determining confidence in syllogistic reasoning. Think Reason 15:69–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raghunathan R, Pham MT (1999) All negative moods are not equal: motivational influences of anxiety and sadness on decision making. Organ Behav Hum Decis 79:56–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reber R, Schwarz N (1999) Effects of perceptual fluency on judgments of truth. Conscious Cogn 8:338–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reber R, Schwarz N, Winkielman P (2004) Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Pers Soc Psychol Rev 8:364–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reder LM, Ritter FE (1992) What determines initial feeling of knowing? Familiarity with question terms, not with the answer. J Exp Psychol Learn 18:435–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reyna VF, Ellis SC (1994) Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in children’s risky decision making. Psychol Sci 5:275–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson MD, Johnson JT, Herndon F (1997) Reaction time and assessments of cognitive effort as predictors of eyewitness memory accuracy and confidence. J Appl Psychol 82:416–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger H, McDermott K (1995) Creating false memories: remembering words not presented in lists. J Exp Psychol Learn 21:803–814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotliman A, Schwarz N (1998) Constructing perceptions of vulnerability: personal relevance and the use of experiential information in health judgements. Pers Soc Psychol B 24:1053–1064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer KR, Ellgring H (2007) Are facial expressions of emotion produced by categorical affect programs or dynamically driven by appraisal? Emotion 7:113–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz B, Benjamin AS, Bjork RA (1997) The inferential and experiential bases of metamemory. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 6:132–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz N (2004) Meta-cognitive experiences in consumer judgment and decision making. J Consum Psychol 14:332–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz N (in press). Feelings-as-information theory. In Van Lange P, Kruglanski A, Higgins ET (eds) Handbook of theories of social psychology. Sage, CA

  • Shynkaruk JM, Thompson VA (2006) Confidence and accuracy in deductive reasoning. Mem Cogn 34:619–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siemer M, Reisenzein R (1998) Effects of mood on evaluative judgements: influence of reduced processing capacity and mood salience. Cogn Emot 12:783–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons JP, Nelson LD (2006) Intuitive confidence: choosing between intuitive and nonintuitive alternatives. J Exp Psychol Gen 135:409–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair M (2010) Misconceptions about intuition. Psychol Inq 21:378–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Son LK (2004) Spacing one’s study: evidence for a metacognitive control strategy. J Exp Psychol Learn 3:601–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Son LK, Metcalfe J (2000) Metacognitive and control strategies in study-time allocation. J Exp Psychol Learn 26:204–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song H, Schwarz N (2008) If it’s hard to read, it’s hard to do: processing fluency affects effort prediction and motivation. Psychol Sci 19:986–988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sporer SL, Penrod S, Read D, Cutler B (1995) Choosing, confidence, and accuracy: a meta-analysis of the confidence-accuracy relation in eye witness identification studies. Psychol Bull 118:315–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich KE (2004) The robot’s rebellion: finding meaning in the age of Darwin. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich KE (2011) Rationality and the reflective mind. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson VA (2009) Dual process theories: A metacognitive perspective. In: Evans J, Frankish K (eds) In two minds: dual processes and beyond. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson VA (2010) Towards a dual process model of conditional inference. In: Oaksford M (ed) The psychology of conditionals. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson VA, Prowse-Turner J, Pennycook G (2011) Intuition, reason & metacognition. Cogn Psychol 63:107–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topolinski S, Reber R (2010) Gaining insight into the “aha” experience. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 19:402–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topolinski S, Strack F (2009a) Scanning the “fringe” of consciousness: what is felt and what is not felt in intuitions about semantic coherence. Conscious Cogn 18:608–618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topolinski S, Strack F (2009b) The architecture of intuition: fluency and affect determine intuitive judgments of semantic and visual coherence and judgments of grammaticality in artificial grammar learning. J Exp Psychol Gen 138:39–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topolinski S, Likowski KU, Weyers P, Strack F (2009) The face of fluency: semantic coherence automatically elicits a specific pattern of facial muscle reactions. Cogn Emot 23:260–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittlesea BWA, Leboe JP (2003) Two fluency heuristics (and how to tell them apart). J Mem Lang 49:62–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkielman P, Cacioppo JT (2001) Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation leads to positive affect. J Pers Soc Psychol 81:989–1000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkielman P, Schwarz N, Fazendeiro T, Reber R (2003) The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgement. In: Musch J, Klaur KC (eds) The psychology of evaluation: affective processes in cognition and emotion. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 189–217

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5A5, Canada

    Valerie Thompson

  2. School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth, Devon, PL4 8AA, UK

    Kinga Morsanyi

Authors
  1. Valerie Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kinga Morsanyi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valerie Thompson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thompson, V., Morsanyi, K. Analytic thinking: do you feel like it?. Mind Soc 11, 93–105 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-012-0100-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-012-0100-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation