Individual differences in conflict detection during reasoning

被引:66
作者
Frey, Darren [1 ,2 ]
Johnson, Eric D. [3 ,4 ]
De Neys, Wim [1 ,2 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Paris Descartes Univ, Sorbonne Paris Cite, LaPsyDE, UMR 8240, 46 Rue St Jacques, FR-75005 Paris, France
[2] Caen Basse Normandie Univ, LaPsyDE, UMR 8240, Paris, France
[3] Univ Barcelona, Dept Basic Psychol, Barcelona, Spain
[4] Univ Barcelona, IR3C, Barcelona, Spain
[5] CNRS, LaPsyDE, UMR 8240, Paris, France
关键词
Reasoning; decision-making; dual-process theory; conflict detection; individual differences; DUAL-PROCESS THEORIES; CONJUNCTION FALLACY; DECISION-MAKING; BIAS DETECTION; SUBSTITUTION SENSITIVITY; COGNITIVE REFLECTION; LOGICAL INTUITIONS; PROCESS MODEL; CONFIDENCE; THINKING;
D O I
10.1080/17470218.2017.1313283
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Decades of reasoning and decision-making research have established that human judgment is often biased by intuitive heuristics. Recent "error" or bias detection studies have focused on reasoners' abilities to detect whether their heuristic answer conflicts with logical or probabilistic principles. A key open question is whether there are individual differences in this bias detection efficiency. Here we present three studies in which co-registration of different error detection measures (confidence, response time and confidence response time) allowed us to assess bias detection sensitivity at the individual participant level in a range of reasoning tasks. The results indicate that although most individuals show robust bias detection, as indexed by increased latencies and decreased confidence, there is a subgroup of reasoners who consistently fail to do so. We discuss theoretical and practical implications for the field.
引用
收藏
页码:1188 / 1208
页数:21
相关论文
共 63 条
[1]  
Ackerman R., INT HDB THINKING REA
[2]   Lax monitoring versus logical intuition: The determinants of confidence in conjunction fallacy [J].
Aczel, Balazs ;
Szollosi, Aba ;
Bago, Bence .
THINKING & REASONING, 2016, 22 (01) :99-117
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1996, Rationality and Reasoning (Essays in Cognitive Psychology)
[4]   A warning intervention improves students’ ability to overcome intuitive interference [J].
Babai R. ;
Shalev E. ;
Stavy R. .
ZDM, 2015, 47 (5) :735-745
[5]   Effects of belief and logic on syllogistic reasoning - Eye-movement evidence for selective processing models [J].
Ball, LJ ;
Phillips, P ;
Wade, CN ;
Quayle, JD .
EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 53 (01) :77-86
[6]   In conflict with ourselves? An investigation of heuristic and analytic processes in decision making [J].
Bonner, Carissa ;
Newell, Ben R. .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 2010, 38 (02) :186-196
[7]  
Bourocher S, 2009, REV ARCHEOL CENT FR, P235
[8]  
Cokely ET, 2012, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V7, P25
[9]   Smarter than we think: When our brains detect that we are biased [J].
De Neys, Wim ;
Vartanian, Oshin ;
Goel, Vinod .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2008, 19 (05) :483-489
[10]   Conflict monitoring in dual process theories of thinking [J].
De Neys, Wim ;
Glumicic, Tamara .
COGNITION, 2008, 106 (03) :1248-1299