Matching bias on the selection task: It's fast and feels good

Abstract

We tested the hypothesis that choices determined by Type 1 processes are compelling because they are fluent, and for this reason they are less subject to analytic thinking than other answers. A total of 104 participants completed a modified version of Wason's selection task wherein they made decisions about one card at a time using a two-response paradigm. In this paradigm participants gave a fast, intuitive response, rated their feeling of rightness (FOR) for that response, and were then allowed free time to reconsider their answers. As we predicted, answers consistent with a matching heuristic (i.e., selecting cards named in the rule) were made more quickly than other answers, were given higher FOR ratings, and received less subsequent analysis as measured by rethinking time and the probability of changing answers. These data suggest that reasoning biases may be compelling because they are fluently generated; this is turn creates a strong FOR, which acts as a signal that further analysis is not necessary.

Keywords:

• Metacognition
• Wason selection task
• Dual process theories
• Feeling of rightness
• Intuition
• Analytic thinking.

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. The authors would like to acknowledge the work of Gordon Pennycook, who programmed the experiment