Search research articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Automatic and controlled components of judgment and decision making.

Mario B Ferreira¹, Leonel Garcia-Marques, Steven J Sherman

¹Department of Psychology and Education, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal. mabf@fpce.ul.pt

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

|October 25, 2006

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

Perception of facial trustworthiness in mild cognitive impairment.

Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD·2026

Same author

Generalization across people is not fundamental to basic research: Reply to Kroupin et al. (2025).

The American psychologist·2025

Same author

I see sick people: Beliefs about sensory detection of infectious disease are largely consistent across cultures.

Brain, behavior, and immunity·2025

Same author

Reconsidering Categorization-Related Inferences from Multicultural and Colorblind Prejudice Reduction Interventions.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2025

Same author

There is nothing WEIRD about basic research: The critical role of convenience samples in psychological science.

The American psychologist·2024

Same author

Measuring the impact of multiple social cues to advance theory in person perception research.

Psychological review·2024

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

This study validates dual-process theories of judgment under uncertainty. It shows that both automatic heuristic reasoning and controlled rule-based reasoning independently contribute to decision-making.

Area of Science:

Cognitive Psychology
Decision Science

Background:

Dual-process theories propose inductive reasoning involves automatic heuristic and controlled rule-based processes.
Empirical evidence for this distinction in judgment under uncertainty has been limited.

Purpose of the Study:

To provide empirical validation for the dual-process perspective on judgment under uncertainty.
To demonstrate the independent contributions of heuristic and rule-based reasoning.

Main Methods:

Utilized the process dissociation procedure (Jacoby, 1991).
Manipulated variables such as processing goals, cognitive resources, priming, and formal training across four experiments.

Main Results:

Consistent evidence supporting the independent contributions of heuristic and rule-based reasoning.

Related Experiment Videos

Experimental manipulations effectively dissociated the two reasoning processes.

Conclusions:

Judgment under uncertainty is not solely automatic or controlled, but a combination of both.
Heuristic and rule-based reasoning make distinct and independent contributions to judgment.