TY - JOUR
T1 - Cognitive reflection, decision biases, and response times
AU - Alós-Ferrer, Carlos
AU - Garagnani, Michele
AU - Hügelschäfer, Sabine
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Alós-Ferrer, Garagnani and Hügelschäfer.
PY - 2016/9/22
Y1 - 2016/9/22
N2 - We present novel evidence on response times and personality traits in standard questions from the decision-making literature where responses are relatively slow (medians around half a minute or above). To this end, we measured response times in a number of incentivized, framed items (decisions from description) including the Cognitive Reflection Test, two additional questions following the same logic, and a number of classic questions used to study decision biases in probability judgments (base-rate neglect, the conjunction fallacy, and the ratio bias). All questions create a conflict between an intuitive process and more deliberative thinking. For each item, we then created a non-conflict version by either making the intuitive impulse correct (resulting in an alignment question), shutting it down (creating a neutral question), or making it dominant (creating a heuristic question). For CRT questions, the differences in response times are as predicted by dual-process theories, with alignment and heuristic variants leading to faster responses and neutral questions to slower responses than the original, conflict questions. For decision biases (where responses are slower), evidence is mixed. To explore the possible influence of personality factors on both choices and response times, we used standard personality scales including the Rational-Experiential Inventory and the Big Five, and used them as controls in regression analysis.
AB - We present novel evidence on response times and personality traits in standard questions from the decision-making literature where responses are relatively slow (medians around half a minute or above). To this end, we measured response times in a number of incentivized, framed items (decisions from description) including the Cognitive Reflection Test, two additional questions following the same logic, and a number of classic questions used to study decision biases in probability judgments (base-rate neglect, the conjunction fallacy, and the ratio bias). All questions create a conflict between an intuitive process and more deliberative thinking. For each item, we then created a non-conflict version by either making the intuitive impulse correct (resulting in an alignment question), shutting it down (creating a neutral question), or making it dominant (creating a heuristic question). For CRT questions, the differences in response times are as predicted by dual-process theories, with alignment and heuristic variants leading to faster responses and neutral questions to slower responses than the original, conflict questions. For decision biases (where responses are slower), evidence is mixed. To explore the possible influence of personality factors on both choices and response times, we used standard personality scales including the Rational-Experiential Inventory and the Big Five, and used them as controls in regression analysis.
KW - Bayesian updating
KW - Cognitive reflection
KW - Decision biases
KW - Decision making
KW - Multiple processes
KW - Response times
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992690719&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992690719&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01402
DO - 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01402
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84992690719
SN - 1664-1078
VL - 7
JO - Frontiers in Psychology
JF - Frontiers in Psychology
IS - SEP
M1 - 1402
ER -