Thinking and decision making Flashcards
thinking and decision making arguments/ initial theory
System 1- automatic, intuitive and effortless way of thinking. System 1 thinking often employs heuristics - that is, a ‘rule’ used to make decisions or form judgements. Heuristics are mental short-cuts that involve focusing on one aspect of a complex problem and ignoring others
This ‘fast’ mode of thinking allows for efficient processing of the often complex world around us but may be prone to errors when our assumptions do not match the reality of a specific situation.
System 2- a slower, conscious and rational mode of thinking. This mode of thinking is assumed to require more effort. System 2 starts by thinking carefully about all of the possible ways we could interpret a situation and gradually eliminates possibilities based on sensory evidence until we arrive at a solution. Rational thinking allows us to analyse the world around us and think carefully about what is happening, why it is happening, what is most likely to happen next and how we might influence the situation.
If we are able to understand how we think and make decisions, then we would be able to see how there may be errors in the way we process info. Using the dual process of thinking, fast/ more intuitive thinking such as system 1 may lead to errors and mistakes in our understanding. This could be important in
decision making which is defined as the process of identifying and choosing alternatives based on the values and preferences of the decision-maker. Decision making is needed during problem-solving to reach the conclusion. Problem-solving is thinking that is directed toward solving specific problems by means of a set of mental strategies. The concepts of problem-solving, decision making and thinking are very much interconnected.
Wason selection task study
Wason wanted to see if people applied logic that would disprove a hypothesis by falsifying it as well as by confirming it.
Method
26 psych students used (I THINK)
Ppt shown a set of cards with 2 faceup, 2 facedown. Each card (4) has a number on one side and a diff color on the other
Ppt given the statement: Which card(s) must be turned over to test the idea that if a card shows an even number on one face, then its opposite face is red?
Most ppt choose red and the no. 8. This is bc of MATCHING BIAS (in an abstract prob, we tend to be influenced by the wording/ context of the question.)
When ppt asked why they chose the cards they did, they werent able to explain their choices
Wason conclusion
Some support for dual process model. Most people make the decision of which cards to choose without any reasoning - but as an automatic response to the context of the question. Wason (1968) found that even when he trained people how to answer this question, when he changed the context, the same mistakes were made.they were given a second test similar to the first one. Ppt getting it wrong shows how strong system 1 can be, and how it can interfere with system 2, even if uv learned how to do it
Goel et al study
Method
Ppt had to carry out logic task
In some cases, the task was abstract (e.g matching a number and color)
Some were concrete tasks (e.g drinking beer and being under 18)
Ppt decided on correct choices while in fmri
Results
different parts of brain were active when processing abstract or non abstract questions
When the task was abstract, the parietal lobe was active; when the task was concrete, the left hemisphere temporal lobe was active.
Parietal lobe associated with spacial processing
Seems to indicate brain process diff type of info differently, supporting the model
in solving the task, there were language and spatial processing regions used
reading the task
peak end rule theory
a heuristic in which people judge an experience largely based on how they felt at its peak (i.e., its most intense point) and at its end, rather than based on the total sum or average of every moment of the experience.
The effect occurs regardless of whether the experience is pleasant or unpleasant.
It is not that other information aside from that of the peak and end of the experience is forgotten, but rather it is not used in reaching a decision or judgement.
Kahneman et al (ice) study
Kahneman et al
Method
repeated measures design
Asked ppt to hold their hand up to the wrist in painfully cold water until they are invited to remove it. 2 conditions:
60 seconds of immersion in water at 14 degrees Celsius. End the end of the 60 seconds the experimenter instructed them to take their hand out.
90 seconds of immersion. The first 60 seconds the same as Condition 1. At the end of 60 seconds, the researcher opened a valve that allowed slightly warmer water to flow into the tub. The water temperature rose about 1 degree Celsius
With their free hand, participants recorded how strong the pain was with 1 finger being little to no pain and 5 fingers being strong pain.
Ppt told they would get one more trial and could pick which one
Results
80% of ppt chose second option
Conclusion
Shows peak end rule
The fact that the second trial was longer was not taken into account by the participants (something called duration neglect).
They were basing their choice on how the condition ended, rather than making an overall assessment of the pain.
Overall eval thinking and decision making
There is biological evidence that different types of thinking may be processed in different parts of the brain.
The Wason selection task and other tests for cognitive biases (see next part of this chapter) are reliable in their results. Easily replicable study that has been repeated with similar results
The model can seem to be overly reductionist as it does not clearly explain how (or even if) these modes of thinking interact or how our thinking and decision making could be influenced by emotion.
The definitions of System 1 and System 2 are not always clear. For example, fast processing indicates the use of System 1 rather than System 2 processes. However, just because a processing is fast does not mean it is done by System 1. Experience can influence System 2 processing to go faster.
