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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |