(2013) found that correct responders were more confident about their responses than incorrect responders. Inconsistent with this reasoning, however, De Neys et al. People who answered incorrectly thought the bat and ball problem was easier than those who answered correctly (incorrect responders judged the proportion of others who answered correctly to be higher than correct responders did), indicating that those who responded intuitively were unaware that the intuition was wrong. In particular, people who responded correctly sometimes wrote the intuitive answer in the margin and described thinking about the intuitive answer in verbal reports, indicating that the intuition did come to mind. In support of the Cognitive Reflection Hypothesis, Frederick (2005) briefly noted several pieces of unpublished evidence. Consistent with this view, we define Cognitive Reflection as the tendency to check and detect intuitive errors, and call the hypothesis that it is the important aspect of the CRT, the Cognitive Reflection Hypothesis. Kahneman (2011) called the bat and ball problem “a test of people's tendency to answer questions with the first idea that comes to mind, without checking it” (p. How much does the ball cost?” The response “10 cents” is thought to come to mind for most, if not all, people, and many people answer “10 cents.” Some people realize that the intuitive response is incorrect, however, and researchers have believed that calculating the correct answer is straightforward at that point: “catching error is tantamount to solving the problem” ( Frederick, 2005, p. The prototypical CRT problem is the bat and ball problem: “A bat and a ball cost $1.10. The CRT is a popular three-item test ( Frederick, 2005) thought to assess cognitive reflection because the items bring to mind intuitive but wrong solutions that have to be overridden. In two studies, we examined whether the CRT was predictive of superior decision making because it measures the ability to check intuitions and/or the ability to solve numeric calculations. However, CRT items also require numeric ability to be answered correctly. In particular, the CRT is thought to measure monitoring of System 1 intuitions such that, if cognitive reflection is high enough, intuitive errors will be detected and the problem will be solved. Scores on the three-item Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) have been linked with dual-system theory and normative decision-making patterns ( Frederick, 2005). Numeric ability appears to be the key mechanism instead. They also indicate that correlations of decision performance with the CRT are insufficient evidence to implicate overriding intuitions in the decision-making biases and outcomes we examined. These findings demonstrate numeric ability as a robust predictor of superior decision making across multiple tasks and outcomes. Results were similar whether the two abilities were modeled (Study 1) or calculated using proportions (Studies 1 and 2). Numeric ability, measured on the CRT or the numeracy scale, accounted for the CRT's ability to predict more normative decisions (a subscale of decision-making competence, incentivized measures of impatient and risk-averse choice, and self-reported financial outcomes) Cognitive Reflection contributed no independent predictive power. In two studies, CRT responses were used to calculate Cognitive Reflection and numeric ability a numeracy scale was also administered. cognitive reflection contributes to better decision making. However, CRT items also require numeric ability to be answered correctly and it is unclear how much numeric ability vs. Scores on the three-item Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) have been linked with dual-system theory and normative decision making ( Frederick, 2005).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |