Item – Theses Canada

​
OCLC number
973355272
Link(s) to full text
LAC copy
Author
Pennycook, Gordon,
Title
What makes us think? : a three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement
Degree
Ph. D. -- University of Waterloo, 2016
Publisher
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada : University of Waterloo, 2016.
Description
1 online resource (x, 98 pages) :illustrations
Notes
Three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement
"A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology."
Includes bibliographical references (pages 83-98).
Abstract
The distinction between intuitive and analytic thinking is common in psychology. However, while often being quite clear on the characteristics of the two processes ('Type 1' processes are fast, autonomous, intuitive, etc. and 'Type 2' processes are slow, deliberative, analytic, etc.), dual-process theorists have been heavily criticized for being unclear on the factors that determine when an individual will think analytically or rely on their intuition. I address this issue by introducing a three-stage model that elucidates the bottom-up factors that cause individuals to engage Type 2 processing. According to the model, multiple Type 1 processes may be cued by a stimulus (Stage 1), leading to the potential for conflict detection (Stage 2). If successful, conflict detection leads to Type 2 processing (Stage 3), which may take the form of rationalization (i.e., the Type 1 output is verified post hoc) or decoupling (i.e., the Type 1 output is falsified). I tested key aspects of the model using a novel base-rate task where stereotypes and base-rate probabilities cued the same (non-conflict problems) or different (conflict problems) responses about group membership. My results support two key predictions derived from the model: 1) conflict detection and decoupling are dissociable sources of Type 2 processing and 2) conflict detection sometimes fails. I argue that considering the potential stages of reasoning allows us to distinguish early (conflict detection) and late (decoupling) sources of analytic thought. Errors may occur at both stages and, as a consequence, bias arises from both conflict monitoring and decoupling failures.
Other link(s)
hdl.handle.net
uwspace.uwaterloo.ca
Subject
Decision making.
Reasoning.
Cognitive psychology.
Prise de décision.
Psychologie cognitive.
Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Conflict Monitoring
Analytic Thinking
Reasoning
Decision Making