Intuition and deliberation in elite expertise.

Intuition and analytic processes in probabilistic reasoning: The role of time pressure

Cooperation is an important prosocial behaviour that is of great significance to individuals and society. The social heuristics hypothesis (SHH) systematically explains how cooperation is interactively affected by intuitive and deliberative processes. On the one hand, the intuitive process can be either cooperative or selfish, which is determined by previous experience. On the other hand, the deliberative process could support either a cooperative decision or a selfish decision, depending on which strategy could maximise the current payoff. This research aims to investigate the mechanism of cooperation. Attachment style was selected as a proxy for previous experience to examine whether and how previous life experience shapes intuitive response. Time constraint (Studies 1 and 2) and cognitive load (Study 3) were manipulated to dissociate the intuitive and deliberative processes. In addition, cooperation was assessed by adopting one-shot public goods games. Results showed that attachment avoidance (Studies 1, 2, and 3) and attachment anxiety (Study 3) significantly predicted cooperation in the intuition condition, whereas these associations were insignificant in the deliberation condition (Studies 1, 2, and 3). These findings provide further support for the SHH and shed new light on the mechanism of cooperation.

A dual-system framework to understand preference construction processes in choice

Can intuition improve deception detection performance?

The dual-system approach holds that deliberative decisions and in-depth evaluation processes lead people to better financial decisions. However, research identifies situations where optimal economic decisions may stem from a more intuitive decision process. In the current work, we present three experimental studies that examined how these two modes-of-thought affect financial decisions. In Study 1, deliberative processes were indeed associated with better one-shot descriptive-based financial decisions. However, Study 2 showed that when participants were asked to make repeated decisions and were required to learn from their experience, the advantage of deliberative over intuitive processes was eliminated. In addition, when participants employed intuitive processes, the quality of their financial decisions improved significantly with experience. Finally, Study 3 showed that the deliberative processing style may lose its advantage when information is not fully available. Overall, these findings suggest that deliberation may contribute to financial decision-making in one-shot decisions. However, when information is lacking, and decisions are repetitive, intuitive processes might be just as good.

Positive Emotion and (Dis)Inhibition Interact to Predict Cooperative Behavior

Cooperation is central to human existence, forming the bedrock of everyday social relationships and larger societal structures. Thus, understanding the psychological underpinnings of cooperation is of both scientific and practical importance. Recent work using a dual-process framework suggests that intuitive processing can promote cooperation while deliberative processing can undermine it. Here we add to this line of research by more specifically identifying deliberative and intuitive processes that affect cooperation. To do so, we applied automated text analysis using the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software to investigate the association between behavior in one-shot anonymous economic cooperation games and the presence inhibition (a deliberative process) and positive emotion (an intuitive process) in free-response narratives written after (Study 1, N = 4,218) or during (Study 2, N = 236) the decision-making process. Consistent with previous results, across both studies inhibition predicted reduced cooperation while positive emotion predicted increased cooperation (even when controlling for negative emotion). Importantly, there was a significant interaction between positive emotion and inhibition, such that the most cooperative individuals had high positive emotion and low inhibition. This suggests that inhibition (i.e., reflective or deliberative processing) may undermine cooperative behavior by suppressing the prosocial effects of positive emotion.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine how intuitive versus deliberative information-processing and linguistic versus visual information influences auditors’ judgement and decision-making (JDM) in a risk assessment. The authors focused on: assessing the risk of material misstatement (RoMM), identifying and documenting risks and controls and task completion time. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an experiment with 284 practicing auditors, manipulating processing mode and presentation format. Participants reviewed a case which they assessed as “realistic.” Hypotheses were tested using ANCOVA analyses. Findings The authors found that intuitive processing led to higher RoMM estimates than deliberative processing – but only in the linguistic format. No difference appeared in the visual format, contrary to expectations. As expected, auditors using intuitive information-processing completed the task faster than those using deliberative-processing but identified fewer risks and controls. Surprisingly, this effect was not dependent on the presentation format. Originality/value The authors contribute to prior studies (Fuller and Kaplan, 2004; Griffith et al., 2021; Wolfe et al., 2020) by showing that intuitive and deliberative processing have distinct effects not only between tasks but also within a single task. Hamdam et al. (2022) theorized that data visualization might enhance intuitive processing in auditor JDM. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the current study is among the first to test this premise empirically in the auditing context. Finally, this study informs firms and regulators that while deliberative processing may improve risk identification and documentation, it does not necessarily affect perceived client risk.

Intuitive and deliberative processes underlying commitment signaling for cooperative assortment

The interplay between intuitive and deliberative processing is known to be important for human decision making. As independent modes, intuitive processes can take on many forms from associative to constructive, while deliberative processes often rely on some notion of decision theoretic rationality or pattern matching. Dual process models attempt to unify these two modes based on parallel constraint networks or on socially or emotionally oriented adjustments to utility functions. This paper presents a new kind of dual process model that unifies decision theoretic deliberative reasoning with intuitive reasoning based on shared cultural affective meanings in a single Bayesian sequential model. Agents constructed according to this unified model are motivated by a combination of affective alignment (intuitive) and decision theoretic reasoning (deliberative), trading the two off as a function of the uncertainty or unpredictability of the situation. The model also provides a theoretical bridge between decision-making research and sociological symbolic interactionism. Starting with a high-level view of existing models, we advance Bayesian Affect Control Theory (BayesACT) as a promising new type of dual process model that explicitly and optimally (in the Bayesian sense) trades off motivation, action, beliefs and utility. We demonstrate a key component of the model as being sufficient to account for some aspects of classic cognitive biases about fairness and dissonance, and outline how this new theory relates to parallel constraint satisfaction models.

Clinical Judgement Analysis: An innovative approach to explore the individual decision-making processes of pharmacists.

The narrative enjoyment and appreciation rationale (NEAR) builds on dual-process logic to distinguish these two forms of audience response to media entertainment shaped by either an intuitive or deliberative processing system. Three message features are critical in determining how these systems govern response: (1) the absence or presence of intuition conflict in the narrative, (2) the extent to which different intuitions are made salient (i.e., emphasized in the plot), and (3) the satisfaction/thwarting of those salient intuitions, where satisfaction refers to reward for acts that conform to intuitions, and thwarting refers to the inverse of this. When all salient intuitive needs are satisfied by entertainment experience, positive affect produced by intuitive processes is labeled enjoyment. By comparison, when the entertainment experience satisfies the most salient intuitive needs, but not all salient intuitive needs, positive affect produced by deliberative processing is labeled appreciation.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to expand the knowledge about the value of intuition for organizational innovativeness and organizational factors inhibiting intuitive decision making.Design/methodology/approach– The study develops and tests a theoretical model that relates intuitive and deliberate decision-making styles to organizational innovativeness, and the application of either decision-making style to organizational size and decision maker's power position in an organization. Based on a survey conducted in 2011, data from 281 organizations was analyzed applying linear regression analysis.Findings– Intuitive and deliberate processing both relate positively to organizational innovativeness. Organizational size relates negatively to the application of an intuitive decision-making style, while power position relates positively to the application of an intuitive decision-making style.Research limitations/implications– The findings suggest that intuitive decision making is valuable for organizational innovativeness. Still, its application is suppressed if decision makers are in lower power positions or part of larger organizations.Originality/value– High demands on managers’ and entrepreneurs’ information processing capabilities require them to apply their full range of cognitive capabilities (i.e. deliberative and intuitive processing). Intuitive decision making, however, still seems to be confined to those who have least reason to fear critique from others.

Decision-making processes in image guided radiotherapy: A think aloud study

This research examines how processing type and alignability moderate the effect of product type on satisfaction (i.e., happiness). It is well known that there are two types of processing―deliberative and intuitive processing. Based on the previous literature that the intuitive processing is compatible with experiential purchases and the deliberative processing is fit with material purchase, the current research demonstrates that processing type moderates the effect of product type on happiness. Moreover, we hypothesize that alignability moderates the effect of product type on anticipated satisfaction. As expected, participants in the intuitive processing condition reported greater happiness from their experiential purchases than material purchases. However, in the deliberative processing condition, there was no significant difference between happiness levels from material and experiential purchases. Furthermore, when the attributes of choice options were presented in a non-alignable manner, participants reported greater anticipated satisfaction from experiential purchases than from material purchases. However, this difference disappeared when attributes were presented in an alignable manner. Finally, we propose ‘choice process’ satisfaction as a potential mediator of the moderating effect of processing type on the relationship between product type and (anticipated) satisfaction.