More than meets the eye? Intuition and analysis revisited

Abstract

Research on individual differences in information processing is characterized by two incompatible theoretical perspectives. The unitary view postulates that analysis and intuition are the opposite poles of a single dimension, whereas the dual-process view proposes that they are independent constructs. We investigated this issue using two established measures of information-processing style, the Cognitive Style Index (CSI) and the Rational–Experiential Inventory (REI), each representative of one of the two conflicting views. We found that the REI’s dimensionality was consistent with the dual-process view, reflected by two uncorrelated factors, although we failed to replicate the instrument developers’ subsequent re-formulation into ability and engagement sub-scales. The structure of the CSI was more problematic, implying the existence of three factors, which is inconsistent with the unitary view advocated by its developers. Our studies suggest that the REI’s original formulation is preferred, and that the unitary conception underpinning the CSI should be abandoned forthwith.