The Experts below are selected from a list of 264 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
David G Rand - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
fake news fast and slow deliberation reduces belief in false but not true news headlines
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2020Co-Authors: Bence Bago, David G Rand, Gordon PennycookAbstract:What role does deliberation play in susceptibility to political misinformation and "fake news"? The Motivated System 2 Reasoning (MS2R) account posits that deliberation causes people to fall for fake news, because reasoning facilitates identity-protective cognition and is therefore used to rationalize content that is consistent with one's political ideology. The classical account of reasoning instead posits that people ineffectively discern between true and false news headlines when they fail to deliberate (and instead rely on intuition). To distinguish between these competing accounts, we investigated the causal effect of reasoning on media truth discernment using a 2-Response paradigm. Participants (N = 1,635 Mechanical Turkers) were presented with a series of headlines. For each, they were first asked to give an initial, Intuitive Response under time pressure and concurrent working memory load. They were then given an opportunity to rethink their Response with no constraints, thereby permitting more deliberation. We also compared these Responses to a (deliberative) 1-Response baseline condition where participants made a single choice with no constraints. Consistent with the classical account, we found that deliberation corrected Intuitive mistakes: Participants believed false headlines (but not true headlines) more in initial Responses than in either final Responses or the unconstrained 1-Response baseline. In contrast-and inconsistent with the Motivated System 2 Reasoning account-we found that political polarization was equivalent across Responses. Our data suggest that, in the context of fake news, deliberation facilitates accurate belief formation and not partisan bias. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
-
co evolution of cooperation and cognition the impact of imperfect deliberation and context sensitive intuition
Proceedings of The Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2017Co-Authors: Adam Bear, Ari Kagan, David G RandAbstract:How does cognitive sophistication impact cooperation? We explore this question using a model of the co-evolution of cooperation and cognition. In our model, agents confront social dilemmas and coordination games, and make decisions using intuition or deliberation. Intuition is automatic and effortless, but relatively (although not necessarily completely) insensitive to context. Deliberation, conversely, is costly but relatively (although not necessarily perfectly) sensitive to context. We find that regardless of the sensitivity of intuition and imperfection of deliberation, deliberating undermines cooperation in social dilemmas, whereas deliberating can increase cooperation in coordination games if intuition is sufficiently sensitive. Furthermore, when coordination games are sufficiently likely, selection favours a strategy whose Intuitive Response ignores the contextual cues available and cooperates across contexts. Thus, we see how simple cognition can arise from active selection for simplicity, rather than just be forced to be simple due to cognitive constraints. Finally, we find that when deliberation is imperfect, the favoured strategy increases cooperation in social dilemmas (as a result of reducing deliberation) as the benefit of cooperation to the recipient increases.
-
Social heuristics and social roles: Intuition favors altruism for women but not for men.
Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2016Co-Authors: David G Rand, Victoria L Brescoll, Jim A C Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene BarceloAbstract:Are humans Intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby Intuitive Responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their Intuitive Response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition relative to deliberation increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1, N = 4,366). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N = 1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
-
social heuristics and social roles intuition favors altruism for women but not for men
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2016Co-Authors: David G Rand, Victoria L Brescoll, Jim A C Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene BarceloAbstract:Are humans Intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby Intuitive Responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their Intuitive Response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N=1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
Helene Barcelo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Social heuristics and social roles: Intuition favors altruism for women but not for men.
Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2016Co-Authors: David G Rand, Victoria L Brescoll, Jim A C Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene BarceloAbstract:Are humans Intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby Intuitive Responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their Intuitive Response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition relative to deliberation increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1, N = 4,366). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N = 1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
-
social heuristics and social roles intuition favors altruism for women but not for men
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2016Co-Authors: David G Rand, Victoria L Brescoll, Jim A C Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene BarceloAbstract:Are humans Intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby Intuitive Responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their Intuitive Response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N=1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
Wim De Neys - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
From bias to sound intuiting: Boosting correct Intuitive reasoning
Cognition, 2021Co-Authors: Esther Boissin, Matthieu T.s. Raoelison, Serge Caparos, Wim De NeysAbstract:Although human thinking is often biased by erroneous intuitions, recent de-bias studies suggest that people's performance can be boosted by short training interventions, where the correct answers to reasoning problems are explained. However, the nature of this training effect remains unclear. Does training help participants correct erroneous intuitions through deliberation? Or does it help them develop correct intuitions? We addressed this issue in three studies, by focusing on the well-known Bat-and-Ball problem. We used a twoResponse paradigm in which participants first gave an initial Intuitive Response, under time pressure and cognitive load, and then gave a final Response after deliberation. Studies 1 and 2 showed that not only did training boost performance, it did so as early as the Intuitive stage. After training, most participants solved the problems correctly from the outset and no longer needed to correct an initial incorrect answer through deliberation. Study 3 indicated that this sound intuiting sustained over at least two months. The findings confirm that a short training can boost sound reasoning at an Intuitive stage. We discuss key theoretical and applied implications.
-
The smart intuitor: Cognitive capacity predicts Intuitive rather than deliberate thinking.
Cognition, 2020Co-Authors: Matthieu T.s. Raoelison, Valerie A. Thompson, Wim De NeysAbstract:Abstract Cognitive capacity is commonly assumed to predict performance in classic reasoning tasks because people higher in cognitive capacity are believed to be better at deliberately correcting biasing erroneous intuitions. However, recent findings suggest that there can also be a positive correlation between cognitive capacity and correct Intuitive thinking. Here we present results from 2 studies that directly contrasted whether cognitive capacity is more predictive of having correct intuitions or successful deliberate correction of an incorrect intuition. We used a two-Response paradigm in which people were required to give a fast Intuitive Response under time pressure and cognitive load and afterwards were given the time to deliberate. We used a direction-of change analysis to check whether correct Responses were generated Intuitively or whether they resulted from deliberate correction (i.e., an initial incorrect-to-correct final Response change). Results showed that although cognitive capacity was associated with the correction tendency (overall r = 0.22) it primarily predicted correct Intuitive responding (overall r = 0.44). These findings force us to rethink the nature of sound reasoning and the role of cognitive capacity in reasoning. Rather than being good at deliberately correcting erroneous intuitions, smart reasoners simply seem to have more accurate intuitions.
-
the Intuitive greater good testing the corrective dual process model of moral cognition
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2019Co-Authors: Bence Bago, Wim De NeysAbstract:Building on the old adage that the deliberate mind corrects the emotional heart, the influential dual process model of moral cognition has posited that utilitarian responding to moral dilemmas (i.e., choosing the greater good) requires deliberate correction of an Intuitive deontological Response. In the present article, we present 4 studies that force us to revise this longstanding "corrective" dual process assumption. We used a two-Response paradigm in which participants had to give their first, initial Response to moral dilemmas under time-pressure and cognitive load. Next, participants could take all the time they wanted to reflect on the problem and give a final Response. This allowed us to identify the Intuitively generated Response that preceded the final Response given after deliberation. Results consistently show that in the vast majority of cases (+ 70%) in which people opt for a utilitarian Response after deliberation, the utilitarian Response is already given in the initial phase. Hence, utilitarian responders do not need to deliberate to correct an initial deontological Response. Their Intuitive Response is already utilitarian in nature. We show how this leads to a revised model in which moral judgments depend on the absolute and relative strength differences between competing deontological and utilitarian intuitions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
-
The Smart System 1: evidence for the Intuitive nature of correct responding on the bat-and-ball problem
Thinking and Reasoning, 2019Co-Authors: Bence Bago, Wim De NeysAbstract:Influential work on reasoning and decision making has popularized the idea that sound reasoning requires correction of fast, Intuitive thought processes by slower and more demanding deliberation. We present seven studies that question this corrective view of human thinking. We focused on the very problem that has been widely featured as the paradigmatic illustration of the corrective view, the well-known bat-and-ball problem. A two-Response paradigm in which people were required to give an initial Response under time-pressure and cognitive load allowed us to identify the presumed Intuitive Response that preceded the final Response given after deliberation. Across our studies we observe that correct final Responses are often non-corrective in nature. Many reasoners who manage to answer the bat-and-ball problem correctly after deliberation already solved it correctly when they reasoned under conditions that minimized deliberation in the initial Response phase. This suggests that sound bat-and-ball reasoners do not necessarily need to deliberate to correct their intuitions, their intuitions are often already correct. Pace the corrective view, findings suggest that in these cases they deliberate to verify correct Intuitive insights.
-
Biased but in doubt: conflict and decision confidence.
PloS one, 2011Co-Authors: Wim De Neys, Sofie Cromheeke, Magda OsmanAbstract:Human reasoning is often biased by Intuitive heuristics. A central question is whether the bias results from a failure to detect that the intuitions conflict with traditional normative considerations or from a failure to discard the tempting intuitions. The present study addressed this unresolved debate by using people's decision confidence as a nonverbal index of conflict detection. Participants were asked to indicate how confident they were after solving classic base-rate (Experiment 1) and conjunction fallacy (Experiment 2) problems in which a cued Intuitive Response could be inconsistent or consistent with the traditional correct Response. Results indicated that reasoners showed a clear confidence decrease when they gave an Intuitive Response that conflicted with the normative Response. Contrary to popular belief, this establishes that people seem to acknowledge that their Intuitive answers are not fully warranted. Experiment 3 established that younger reasoners did not yet show the confidence decrease, which points to the role of improved bias awareness in our reasoning development. Implications for the long standing debate on human rationality are discussed.
Victoria L Brescoll - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Social heuristics and social roles: Intuition favors altruism for women but not for men.
Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2016Co-Authors: David G Rand, Victoria L Brescoll, Jim A C Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene BarceloAbstract:Are humans Intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby Intuitive Responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their Intuitive Response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition relative to deliberation increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1, N = 4,366). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N = 1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
-
social heuristics and social roles intuition favors altruism for women but not for men
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2016Co-Authors: David G Rand, Victoria L Brescoll, Jim A C Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene BarceloAbstract:Are humans Intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby Intuitive Responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their Intuitive Response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N=1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
Jim A C Everett - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Social heuristics and social roles: Intuition favors altruism for women but not for men.
Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2016Co-Authors: David G Rand, Victoria L Brescoll, Jim A C Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene BarceloAbstract:Are humans Intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby Intuitive Responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their Intuitive Response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition relative to deliberation increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1, N = 4,366). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N = 1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
-
social heuristics and social roles intuition favors altruism for women but not for men
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2016Co-Authors: David G Rand, Victoria L Brescoll, Jim A C Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene BarceloAbstract:Are humans Intuitively altruistic, or does altruism require self-control? A theory of social heuristics, whereby Intuitive Responses favor typically successful behaviors, suggests that the answer may depend on who you are. In particular, evidence suggests that women are expected to behave altruistically, and are punished for failing to be altruistic, to a much greater extent than men. Thus, women (but not men) may internalize altruism as their Intuitive Response. Indeed, a meta-analysis of 13 new experiments and 9 experiments from other groups found that promoting intuition increased giving in a Dictator Game among women, but not among men (Study 1). Furthermore, this effect was shown to be moderated by explicit sex role identification (Study 2, N=1,831): the more women described themselves using traditionally masculine attributes (e.g., dominance, independence) relative to traditionally feminine attributes (e.g., warmth, tenderness), the more deliberation reduced their altruism. Our findings shed light on the connection between gender and altruism, and highlight the importance of social heuristics in human prosociality.
