Examining the influence of anecdotal stories and the interplay of individual differences on reasoning

References

• Amsel, E., Klaczynski, P. A., Johnston, A., Bench, S., Close, J., Sadler, E., & Walker, R. (2008). A dual-process account of the development of scientific reasoning: The nature and development of metacognitive intercession skills. Cognitive Development, 23, 452–471. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bensley, D. A., & Haynes, C. (1995). The acquisition of general purpose strategic knowledge for argumentation. Teaching of Psychology, 22, 41–45. doi: 10.1207/s15328023top2201_13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgida, E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1977). The differential impact of abstract vs. concrete information on decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 7, 258–271. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1977.tb00750.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrnes, J. P., & Dunbar, K. N. (2014). The nature and development of critical-analytic thinking. Educational Psychology Review, 26, 477–493. doi: 10.1007/s10648-014-9284-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.119.2.197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Morris, K. J. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805–818. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.45.4.805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlstrom, M. F. (2012). The persuasive influence of narrative causality: Psychological mechanism, strength in overcoming resistance, and persistence over time. Media Psychology, 15, 303–326. doi: 10.1080/15213269.2012.702604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlstrom, M. F. (2014). Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111( Suppl. 4), 13614–13620. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320645111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. (1994). Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: When people behave against their better judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 819–829. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8014830
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillard, A. J., & Main, J. L. (2013). Using a health message with a testimonial to motivate colon cancer screening: Associations with perceived identification and vividness. Health Education & Behavior, 40, 673–682. doi: 10.1177/1090198112473111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein, S., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V., & Heier, H. (1996). Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 390–405. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.390
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, J. S. B. T. (2003). In two minds: Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 454–459. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2003.08.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255–278. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fong, G. T., Krantz, D. H., & Nisbett, R. E. (1986). The effects of statistical training on thinking about everyday problems. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 253–292. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(86)90001-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fong, G. T., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). Immediate and delayed transfer of training effects in statistical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 34–45. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.120.1.34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glöckner, A., & Witteman, C. (2010). Beyond dual-process models: A categorisation of processes underlying intuitive judgement and decision making. Thinking & Reasoning, 16, 1–25. doi: 10.1080/13546780903395748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, M. C. (2006). Narratives and cancer communication. Journal of Communication, 56, S163–S183. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00288.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 701–721. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenhoot, A. F., Semb, G., Colombo, J., & Schreiber, T. (2004). Prior beliefs and methodological concepts in scientific reasoning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 203–221. doi: 10.1002/acp.959
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamill, R., Wilson, T. D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1980). Insensitivity to sample bias: Generalizing from atypical cases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 578–589. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.39.4.578
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heit, E., & Rotello, C. M. (2012). The pervasive effects of argument length on inductive reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 18, 244–277. doi: 10.1080/13546783.2012.695161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Strauss, Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics of intuitive judgement: Extensions and applications (pp. 49–81). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Klaczynski, P. A., Gordon, D. H., & Fauth, J. (1997). Goal-oriented critical reasoning and individual differences in critical reasoning biases. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 470–485. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.89.3.470
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klaczynski, P. A., & Lavallee, K. L. (2005). Domain-specific identity, epistemic regulation, and intellectual ability as predictors of belief-biased reasoning: A dual-process perspective. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 1–24. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2005.05.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koslowski, B., Marasia, J., Chelenza, M., & Dublin, R. (2008). Information becomes evidence when an explanation can incorporate it into a causal framework. Cognitive Development, 23, 472–487. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.09.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (2009). Do students need to be taught how to reason? Educational Research Review, 4, 1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2008.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D., Iordanou, K., Pease, M., & Wirkala, C. (2008). Beyond control of variables: What needs to develop to achieve skilled scientific thinking? Cognitive Development, 23, 435–451. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.09.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehman, D. R., Lempert, R. O., & Nisbett, R. E. (1988). The effects of graduate training on reasoning: Formal discipline and thinking about everyday-life events. American Psychologist, 43, 431–442. doi: 10.1037//0003-066X.43.6.431
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehman, D. R., & Nisbett, R. E. (1990). A longitudinal study of the effects of undergraduate training on reasoning. Developmental Psychology, 26, 952–960. doi: 10.1037//0012-1649.26.6.952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macpherson, R., & Stanovich, K. E. (2007). Cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, and instructional set as predictors of critical thinking. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 115–127. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2007.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morewedge, C. K., & Kahneman, D. (2010). Associative processes in intuitive judgment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 435–440. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2010.07.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M. (2005). The effect of goal instructions and need for cognition on interactive argumentation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 286–313. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pacini, R., & Epstein, S. (1999). The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 972–987. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.972
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotello, C. M., & Heit, E. (2009). Modeling the effects of argument length and validity on inductive and deductive reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1317–1330. doi: 10.1037/a0016648
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sá, W. C., Kelley, C. N., Ho, C., & Stanovich, K. E. (2005). Thinking about personal theories: individual differences in the coordination of theory and evidence. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1149–1161. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2004.07.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schunn, C. D., & Anderson, J. R. (1999). The generality/specificity of expertise in scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 23, 337–370. doi: 10.1016/S0364-0213(99)00006-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• See, Y. H. M., Petty, R. E., & Evans, L. M. (2009). The impact of perceived message complexity and need for cognition on information processing and attitudes. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 880–889. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.04.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 342–357. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 161–188. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.127.2.161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strange, J. J., & Leung, C. C. (1999). How anecdotal accounts in news and in fiction can influence judgments of a social problem's urgency, causes, and cures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 436–449. doi: 10.1177/0146167299025004004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, V. A., Turner, J. A. P., & Pennycook, G. (2011). Intuition, reason, and metacognition. Cognitive Psychology, 63, 107–140. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.06.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2003). Associations between myside bias on an informal reasoning task and amount of post-secondary education. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 851–860. doi: 10.1002/acp.915
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011). The cognitive reflection test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks. Memory & Cognition, 39, 1275–1289. doi: 10.3758/s13421-011-0104-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Rational thinking and cognitive sophistication: Development, cognitive abilities, and thinking dispositions. Developmental Psychology, 50, 1037–1048. doi: 10.1037/a0034910
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ubel, P. A., Jepson, C., & Baron, J. (2001). The inclusion of patient testimonials in decision aids: Effects on treatment choices. Medical Decision Making, 21, 60–68. doi: 10.1177/0272989X0102100108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 930–941. doi: 10.1037/a0012842
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winterbottom, A., Bekker, H. L., Conner, M., & Mooney, A. (2008). Does narrative information bias individual's decision making? A systematic review. Social Science & Medicine, 67, 2079–2088. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.037
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific seasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20, 99–149. doi: 10.1006/drev.1999.0497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172–223. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2006.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar