Cargando…

Cognitive Reflection, Decision Biases, and Response Times

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alós-Ferrer, Carlos, Garagnani, Michele, Hügelschäfer, Sabine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5031706/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27713710
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01402
_version_ 1782454840609210368
author Alós-Ferrer, Carlos
Garagnani, Michele
Hügelschäfer, Sabine
author_facet Alós-Ferrer, Carlos
Garagnani, Michele
Hügelschäfer, Sabine
author_sort Alós-Ferrer, Carlos
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5031706
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50317062016-10-06 Cognitive Reflection, Decision Biases, and Response Times Alós-Ferrer, Carlos Garagnani, Michele Hügelschäfer, Sabine Front Psychol Psychology 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. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5031706/ /pubmed/27713710 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01402 Text en Copyright © 2016 Alós-Ferrer, Garagnani and Hügelschäfer. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Alós-Ferrer, Carlos
Garagnani, Michele
Hügelschäfer, Sabine
Cognitive Reflection, Decision Biases, and Response Times
title Cognitive Reflection, Decision Biases, and Response Times
title_full Cognitive Reflection, Decision Biases, and Response Times
title_fullStr Cognitive Reflection, Decision Biases, and Response Times
title_full_unstemmed Cognitive Reflection, Decision Biases, and Response Times
title_short Cognitive Reflection, Decision Biases, and Response Times
title_sort cognitive reflection, decision biases, and response times
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5031706/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27713710
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01402
work_keys_str_mv AT alosferrercarlos cognitivereflectiondecisionbiasesandresponsetimes
AT garagnanimichele cognitivereflectiondecisionbiasesandresponsetimes
AT hugelschafersabine cognitivereflectiondecisionbiasesandresponsetimes