Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Intuitive and deliberate decisions can be accounted for by the same cognitive process model

Bibliographic Data

ID21641007
AuthorsSarah Forst (0009-0001-7117-7861), Sarah Helene Forst (University of Mannheim, corresponding author), Andreas Glöckner (0000-0002-7766-4791, University of Cologne)
Year2026
Volume33
Issue2
Pages83-83
Publication date2026-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePsychonomic Bulletin & Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1069-9384 • E-ISSN: 1531-5320
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.3758/s13423-025-02853-9
PMID41708559
OpenAlexW7130377546
LanguageEN
References cited94

A central open question in research on intuitive and deliberate cognitive processing is whether both can be captured by adaptations within a single cognitive mechanism or require distinct computational processes. We test whether interactive activation processes, proposed as general models of cognition, can account for both intuitive and deliberate decisions. In an online experiment ( N = 128), we analyzed the effects of decision-mode instructions in a probabilistic inference task using a computational modeling approach. The manipulation of decision mode was successful as indicated by substantial changes in decision time and subjective experience of conscious decision-making. The manipulation, however, did not influence the distribution of decision strategies. There was no indication that more serial, rule-based, as opposed to holistic, associative (i.e., coherence-based) processes were used under a deliberation instruction. In both conditions, a Parallel Constraint Satisfaction (PCS) model for decision-making, which is based on interactive activation processes, accounted best for the data for the majority of participants. Deliberation increased the quality of the choices measured as adherence to a rational standard. In the deliberation mode, the observed patterns of response times and confidence were more in line with the predictions of the PCS model than under an intuitive instruction. Our results are consistent with an integrated processes perspective, suggesting that coherence-based mechanisms can account for behavior under both intuitive and deliberate decision modes

Associative property · Cognition · Cognitive model · Computational model · Deliberation · Inference · Probabilistic logic · Behavioral Health and Interventions · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

  • Parallel Distributed Processing

    David E Rumelhart, James L Mcclelland et al.•Parallel Distributed Processing•1986

  • Two-stage dynamic signal detection

    Timothy J Pleskac, Jerome R Busemeyer•Psychological Review•2010

  • Conflict monitoring and cognitive control.

    M M Botvinick, Todd S Braver et al.•Psychological Review•2001

  • An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception

    James L Mcclelland, David E Rumelhart•Psychological Review•1981

  • Two Is Not Always Better Than One

    Open Access•Gideon Keren, Yaacov Schul•Perspectives on Psychological…•2009

  • Beyond dual-process models

    Andreas Glöckner, Cilia Witteman•Thinking & Reasoning•2010

  • Adaptive strategy selection in decision making.

    John W Payne, James R Bettman et al.•Journal of Experimental…•1988

  • Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles.

    Arie W Kruglanski, Gerd Gigerenzer•Psychological Review•2011

  • An evaluation of dual-process theories of reasoning

    Open Access•Magda Osman•Psychonomic Bulletin & Review•2004

  • Reasoning the fast and frugal way

    Gerd Gigerenzer, Daniel G Goldstein•Psychological Review•1996

  • The speed-accuracy tradeoff

    Open Access•Richard P Heitz•Frontiers in Neuroscience•2014

  • The Mythical Number Two

    Open Access•David E Melnikoff, John A Bargh•Trends in Cognitive Sciences•2018

  • What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement

    Open Access•Gordon Pennycook, David Rand et al.•Cognitive Psychology•2015

  • Representativeness Revisited

    Open Access•Daniel Kahneman, Shane Frederick•Heuristics and biases•2002

  • Distinguishing the reflective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds

    Keith E Stanovich•In two minds•2009

  • Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1

    Open Access•Franz Faul, Edgar Erdfelder et al.•Behavior Research Methods•2009

  • Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4

    Open Access•David M Bates, Douglas Bates et al.•Journal of Statistical Software•2015

  • Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition

    Jonathan St B T Evans•Annual Review of Psychology•2008

  • LmerTest Package

    Open Access•Alexandra Kuznetsova, Per B Brockhoff et al.•Journal of Statistical Software•2017

  • Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition

    Open Access•Jonathan St B T Evans, Keith E Stanovich•Perspectives on Psychological…•2013

  • Toward Parsimony in Bias Research

    Open Access•Aileen Oeberst, Roland Imhoff•Perspectives on Psychological…•2023

  • Toward a General Framework of Biased Reasoning

    Open Access•Dan Simon, Stephen J Read•Perspectives on Psychological…•2025

  • On Dual- and Single-Process Models of Thinking

    Open Access•Wim De Neys•Perspectives on Psychological…•2021

  • Reframing Single- and Dual-Process Theories as Cognitive Models

    Open Access•Aliya Rumana•Perspectives on Psychological…•2021

  • How Computational Modeling Can Force Theory Building in Psychological Science

    Open Access•Olivia Guest, Andrea E Martin•Perspectives on Psychological…•2021

  • System 2 and cognitive transparency

    Nicolas Beauvais, Aikaterini Voudouri et al.•Thinking & Reasoning•2026

  • A framework for building cognitive process models

    Open Access•Sam Garkawe, Jana B Jarecki et al.•Psychonomic Bulletin & Review•2020

  • Confidence ratings increase response thresholds in decision making

    Open Access•Chunliang Yang, Baike Li et al.•Psychonomic Bulletin & Review•2024

  • Identifying similarity- and rule-based processes in quantitative judgments

    Open Access•Florian I Seitz, Rebecca Albrecht et al.•Psychonomic Bulletin & Review•2025

  • Evidence or Confidence

    Open Access•Douglas G Lee, Jean Daunizeau et al.•Psychonomic Bulletin & Review•2023

  • Strategy selection in decisions from givens

    Open Access•Thorsten Pachur•Cognitive Psychology•2022

  • The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion

    Richard E Petty, John T Cacioppo•1986

  • Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors

    Ziva Kunda, Paul Thagard•Psychological Review•1996

  • Connectionist Models of Social Reasoning and Social Behavior

    Stephen John Read, Lynn C Miller•Connectionist Models of Social…•2014

  • Ignorance or integration

    Open Access•Shahar Ayal, Guy Hochman•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2009

  • A Dual‐Process Diffusion Model

    Open Access•Carlos Alós-Ferrer, Carlos Alós‐Ferrer•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2016

  • Coherence shifts in probabilistic inference tasks

    Open Access•Andreas Glöckner, Tilmann Betsch et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2009

  • The rationality of different kinds of intuitive decision processes

    Open Access•Marc Jekel, Andreas Glöckner et al.•Synthese•2012

  • The coherence effect

    Dan Simon, Douglas M Stenstrom et al.•Journal of Personality and Social…•2015

  • The empirical case for two systems of reasoning

    Steven A Sloman•Psychological Bulletin•1996

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae