engleski

Dual or single process conflict resolution

Classic tasks from the dual-process approach to reasoning pit two (presumably) qualitatively different processes against each other to induce conflict. In this study, we aim to investigate how conflict between two heuristics of the same type is resolved. At the start of the task, information about two cohorts equally represented in a group (e.g., 500 mathematicians and 500 boxers) is presented. Next, information that a randomly selected person from the group has two specific character traits (highly-educated and physically strong) is given. Participants had to decide whether the person was more likely a mathematician or a boxer. This example is from a high-conflict condition since the character traits strongly cue opposing responses. Based on pre-studies, we created a 2(conflict/congruent) by 2(high/moderate) experiment in which we recorded participant's (N=113) responses, response times and confidence judgments. As expected, participants were fastest, most confident and most accurate in the high-congruence condition and the opposite is true for the high-conflict condition. Key results reveal there was no significant difference between conditions of moderate congruence and moderate conflict which would be unexpected in a classic dual-process account. This indicates there may be a single-process mechanism which integrates information when same type heuristics are being exploited.

reasoning ; dual-process theory ; heuristic processes ; conflict detection ; meta-reasoning

nije evidentirano