Thinking & Decision Making

• Cognitive Approach


  Thinking & Decision Making
• Dual Processing Theory of thinking & decision making
• System 1 thinking


  • Automatic, intuitive and effortless way of thinking
  • Does not place high demands on working memory
  • Non-conscious (we are not aware of it)
  • Often employs heuristics to make decisions or form judgements
• Heuristics


  Mental short-cuts that involve focusing on one aspect of a complex problem and ignoring others to make an economic decision
• System 1 thinking


  • Allows for efficient processing of the often complex world around us
  • May be prone to errors when our assumptions do not match the reality of a specific situation
  • Creates a greater feeling of certitude (certainty that our initial response is correct)
• System 2 thinking


  • Slower, conscious and rational mode of thinking
  • Places high demands on working memory
  • Involves thinking carefully about all of the possible ways we could interpret a situation and gradually eliminates possibilities until we arrive at a solution
  • Can include approaches like hypothesis testing, hypothetical thinking consequential decision making & forecasting
• System 2 thinking


  Less likely to create feelings of certitude since we have considered all potential consequences of a decision and as a result we are more likely to doubt ourselves
• How the Systems Interact


  1. System 1 runs automatically and is used to make most everyday decisions

  2. System 2 continually monitors and controls behaviour but relies largely on System 1 for information
• Why we tend to rely on System 1 thinking

  • Kahneman's "law of least effort" - people will gravitate to the least demanding course of action
  • We are cognitive misers- wanting to use as little energy as possible to make decisions
  • We are more likely to use System 1 thinking when our cognitive load is high or when we make a decision quickly
• When we use System 2 thinking

  • The task is complex
  • The decision is important or has heightened personal relevance
  • The decision maker is held accountable by others for whatever choice they make
• System 1 thinking

  Quick, intuitive thinking that can lead to errors
• System 2 thinking

  Slower, more rational form of thinking that is activated when difficulties are encountered
• The findings have significant practical applications as they provide insight into how we can decrease the likelihood of erroneous thinking. This could be applied to education.
• Alter & Oppenheimer study


  • Highly controlled lab experiment
  • Participants randomly allocated to conditions
  • Completed the same task under the same conditions
  • Only difference was the type of font the test was displayed in
  • High level of control over extraneous variables
• The high level of control over extraneous variables


  Means a cause and effect relationship can be established between fluency and problem solving ability
• Although the use of an independent measures design decreases the risk of demand characteristics and eliminates order effects, it is possible that individual differences between the participants might have influenced the results.
• The CRT is made up of 'trick' questions which rarely come up in everyday life. Therefore the ecological validity of the study is low as it is not clear if the same results would be found when making everyday decisions
• Repeated measures design


  Participants take part in all of the conditions of the experiment
• Gilead et al (2013) study


  • Research method: Lab experiment
  • Experimental design: Repeated measures design
  • Sample: 24 students from Tel-Aviv university(12 male and 12 female) aged 18-27
  • All participants were right handed and had no history of neurological or psychiatric disorders
  • Participants gave written consent prior to the experiment
• fMRI


  Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging - a brain imaging technology that shows which areas of the brain are active when completing a particular task
• Counterbalancing


  A control for order effects that involves randomising the order in which participants experience conditions of an experiment
• Abstract question


  • Why do people watch TV?
• They observed a difference in brain activity for concrete and abstract tasks
• When answering concrete questions the fronto-parietal regions of the brain were active
• When abstract questions were asked the posterior region of the brain was active
• The study provides biological evidence for the idea that there are different systems of thinking

  Because it was found that different regions of the brain were active when answering questions that involved different types of reasoning
• Answering concrete questions


  Would use System 1 thinking
• Answering abstract questions


  Might require System 2 thinking
• This study provides biological support for the Dual Processing Model as it shows that different parts of the brain are active for different types of thinking
• Gilead et al study


  • Repeated measures design eliminates individual differences in the way that we process information from impacting the results
  • Use of counterbalancing eliminates order effects such as fatigue or boredom impacting the results
• fMRIs are problematic for establishing causation because active areas of the brain may not be directly related to the task at hand- we may be unconsciously processing other thoughts as well that activate different regions of the brain
• The fMRI is a loud and confined space that is not representative of the real life environment- some people find being inside an fMRI machine scary. This might mean that brain activity in the scanner may not represent brain activity under normal circumstances- there is no guarantee that the same regions of the brain would be active when completing these tasks outside of the scanning environment
• Evidence for Dual Processing Model

  • Gilead's study provides biological evidence that different areas of the brain are activated for different types of decision making
  • Experimental research supports the model's premise that we are more likely to rely on System 2 thinking when we encounter a task that appears complex
  • Research on various cognitive biases also provide support for the idea that we often rely on intuitive thinking
  • The model is consistent with evolutionary theories of behaviour
• Applications of Dual Processing Model


  • The model can provide an explanation for why people (including intelligent people) often make systematic & predictable errors
  • The concept of System 1 and 2 thinking have been applied to sales and marketing techniques and marketing consultants frequently cite how businesses should capitalise on knowledge of thinking systems when marketing products
• Much of the supporting evidence comes from lab experiments which have low ecological validity
• Not all researchers agree that there are two systems. Some alternate models of thinking have suggested that there are four (or more) different systems of thinking
• The model can seem to be overly reductionist. It does not clearly explain how these modes of thinking interact or how our thinking and decision making could be influenced by other factors like emotion, intelligence or cultural norms.
• The dual processing model has been extensively researched and developed over time
• It provides insight into why we may make particular errors when thinking and decision making