Thinking styles and decision making: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis examined whether tendencies to use reflective and intuitive thinking styles predicted decision performance (normatively correct responding) and decision experience (e.g., speed, enjoyment) on a range of decision-making tasks. A pooled sample of 17,704 participants (Mage = 25 years) from 89 samples produced small but significant weighted average effects for reflection on performance (r = .11) and experience (r = .14). Intuition was negatively associated with performance (r = -.09) but positively associated with experience (r = .06). Moderation analyses using 499 effect sizes revealed heterogeneity across task-theory match/mismatch, task type, description-based versus experience-based decisions, time pressure, age, and measure type. Effects of both thinking styles were strongest when the task matched the theoretical strengths of the thinking style (up to r = .29). Specific tasks that produced the largest thinking style effects (up to r = .35) were also consistent with system characteristics. Time pressure weakened the effects of reflection, but not intuition, on performance. Effect sizes for reflection on performance were largest for individuals aged either 12 to 18 years or 25+ (up to r = .18), and the effects of both reflection and intuition on experience were largest for adults aged 25+ (up to r = .27). Overall, our results indicate that associations between thinking styles and decision outcomes are context dependent. To improve decision performance and experience, decision architects and educators should carefully consider both individual differences in the decision maker and the nature of the decision task.