Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Automatic-heuristic and executive-analytic processing during reasoning: Chronometric and dual-task considerations.

Wim De Neys1

  • 1University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. Wim.Deneys@psy.kuleuven.be

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (2006)
|August 4, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Can we train better medical intuition? Exploring the potential of debiasing interventions.

Presse medicale (Paris, France : 1983)·2026
Same author

Using large language models to estimate belief strength in reasoning.

Behavior research methods·2026
Same author

Intuitive insight: Fast associative processes drive sound creative thinking.

Cognition·2026
Same author

Humans and LLMs rate deliberation as superior to intuition on complex reasoning tasks.

Communications psychology·2025
Same author

Moses illusions, fast and slow.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2025
Same author

Debiasing in motion: Boosting sound intuiting through animated video training.

Acta psychologica·2025

Human reasoning often uses quick, intuitive thinking over slow, analytic thought. This study confirms analytic reasoning requires executive resources, while intuitive processing is automatic, supporting dual-process theories.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Human Reasoning
  • Dual-Process Theory

Background:

  • Human reasoning frequently defaults to intuitive, heuristic processing over deliberate analytic inference.
  • Dual-process theories propose analytic operations are time-consuming and executive-dependent, while heuristic processing is automatic.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To empirically test the dual-process theory's claim that analytic reasoning requires executive resources.
  • To differentiate the processing demands of heuristic versus analytic cognitive systems.

Main Methods:

  • Four experiments were conducted using conjunction fallacy problems and selection tasks (indicative and deontic).
  • Processing time was measured, and executive resources were burdened using attention-demanding secondary tasks.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Analytic inferences required significantly more processing time than heuristic inferences.
  • Impairing executive resources via secondary tasks reduced analytic responding and increased heuristic errors (conjunction fallacies, indicative matching).

Conclusions:

  • Findings support the dual-process framework's core assumptions about distinct processing systems.
  • The study validates the role of executive functions in analytic reasoning and the automaticity of heuristic processing.