Alter and Oppenheimer (2007)

Question 1

Aim.

Answer 1

Not all researchers agree that there are two systems. Some alternate models of thinking have suggested that there are four (or more) different systems of thinking.

Question 2

Hypothesis.

Answer 2

When experiencing difficulty or disfluency during the course of reasoning would trigger System 2 processes and decrease the frequency of responses consistent
with System 1 processes.

Question 3

Method.

Answer 3

• 40 Princeton students were randomly assigned to complete either the fluent or the disfluent version of the Cognitive Reflections Test (CRT).
• The CRT is made up of 3 questions, and measures whether people use fast thinking to answer the question (and get it wrong) or use slow thinking (and get it right)
• ​Fluent condition (control) – easy to read font
• Disfluent condition – difficult to read font

Question 4

Results and Conclusion.

Answer 4

• As predicted, participants answered more items on the CRT correctly in the disfluent font condition (M 2.45) than in the fluent font condition (M 1.90).
  Conclusion
• When the CRT was difficult to read, participants appeared to engage in systematic
  processing (System 2 thinking) and overcame their invalid intuitions to answer more questions correctly.​
• On the other hand, when the question is written in an easy-to-read font, participants use quick, unconscious and automatic System 1 thinking to come up with the obvious (but incorrect) answer
• These results provide evidence that disfluency initiates systematic processing. Disfluency is one cue that leads people to adopt a systematic approach to information processing

Question 5

Outline strengths.

Answer 5

This study provides evidence for dual processing theory, offering support for Kahneman’s model of fast System 1 and slow System 2 thinking.

Question 6

Outline limitations.

Answer 6

• The results may have been due to the explanation that presenting the test items in a disfluent font simply slowed participants down, thereby forcing them to process the information more carefully.
• Studies have estimated that between 44 and 51% of research participants have previously been exposed to the CRT, so repeated use with university students may result in practise effects.
• The CRT is made up of “trick” questions, which rarely come up in everyday life. Therefore, the ecological validity of this study is low, as the real-world significance of these findings is unclear.