Thinking and Decision Making: Dual processing model of thinking and decision making

Intro

• The dual processing model of thinking and decision-making is proposed by Kahneman and Tversky (1974) and is based on the assumptions that humans are cognitive misers, meaning it is our natural tendency to minimise our effort to think 

• They proposed two distinctive cognitive systems, namely System 1 thinking and system 2 thinking. 

System 1

• System 1 thinking is a fast mode of thinking 

• it is effortless, automatic and intuitive 

  • It relies greatly on intuitions and predictions that allow us to obtain information in an efficient way, but is more prone to errors.

  • System 1 thinking often employs heuristics, which are mental shortcuts that allow solutions to be reached rapidly in situations with incomplete information 

  • Examples of heuristics include priming and anchoring.

    • Priming is when a situation or information puts a particular schema at the forefront of our minds 

    • Anchoring is when we rely too heavily on the first piece of information we see when making judgments and decisions 

System 2

• System 2 thinking is a slow mode of thinking 

• It is rational, logical and conscious 

  • Responsible for complex problem solving, logical reasoning, and conscious decision-making

It allows us to make logical and reliable judgments but requires a large amount of time and mental energy

Study: Kahnemann and Tversky (1976)  

• Aim: 

  • To investigate the influence of anchoring bias on estimation 

• Procedure: 

  • Participants were separated into two conditions →  ascending and descending conditions

  • Both conditions require estimating a calculation in 5 seconds, ensuring they can’t calculate and must rely on estimation.

  • Ascending group calculated 1x2x3x4x5x6x7x8 while the descending group calculates 8x7x6x5x4x3x2x1

  • The researchers assume that since we read from left to right, the ascending group will use 1 as an anchor, and come up with a smaller estimation , while the descending group will use 8 as an anchor and come up with a higher estimation

Findings

• Findings: 

  • Results show a median of 520 in ascending and 2250 in descending. 

  • The results confirmed the researchers' prediction that the anchor would bias the estimation. 

Conclusion and link

• Conclusion 

  • It was concluded that anchoring has a strong effect on participants’ cognition 

• Link: this study supports the theory as it shows the occurrence of anchoring bias, as the participants who used the anchor 8 estimated a higher number → it supports how it is our natural tendency to minimise our efforts to think and employ heuristics to arrive at solutions efficiently, providing empirical evidence for System 1 thinking