Three experimental studies provided evidence that the choice and usage of cognitive strategies depended on intelligence, personality, and ‘intelligence-related’ personality traits. A modified version of the analogical reasoning task was employed in order to examine the qualitatively different strategies adopted by subjects. In Experimental 1, two strategies were identified: analytical and global. They differed in the amount of time allocated to consecutive stages of the task. Psychometric intelligence appeared to be related to the analytical strategy. In Experiment 2, the analytical strategy was more frequent in the case of verbally fluent or neurotic (EPO) subjects, whereas the global strategy appeared more typical of subjects who obtained higher scores in strength of excitation and mobility (Strelau's STI-R), or extraversion (EPQ). In Experiment 3, these findings were replicated. Additionally, an Absorption subscale from a newly developed Intellectual Experience Scale was negatively associated with use of the global strategy. The data are interpreted in terms of the information-processing demands of both strategies. It is suggested that the analytical strategy is associated with increased working memory capacity, and narrowed focus of attention. By contrast, the global strategy may be associated with decreased working memory capacity, and wider focus of attention. An alternative explanation based on semantic memory mechanisms is also suggested.