Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 20, 2025

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal
Published on: April 18, 2017
The Dual Process model: the effect of cognitive load on the ascription of intentionality
Micaela Maria Zucchelli1, Nicola Matteucci Armandi Avogli Trotti1, Andrea Pavan1
1Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Background:
The classic Dual Process model posits that decision-making is determined by the interplay of an intuitive System 1 and a logical System 2. In contrast, the revised model suggests that intuition can also be logical. The Cognitive load paradigm has been used to distinguish underlying rational and intuitive processes, as it tends to lead to the use of heuristics over reasoning. Through two studies, we aimed to investigate the impact of two increasing levels of extraneous cognitive load on intentionality decision-making by comparing the two decision-making models.
Methods:
The task required participants to attribute intentionality to negative and positive side effects, which were foreseeable but not deliberately intended. This compared an intuitive response, focused on the outcome, with a logical one, focused on the absence of intention. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the six experimental conditions, each with varying cognitive loads (high cognitive load vs. low cognitive load vs. no cognitive load) and scenario valence (negative vs. positive). In Study 1, cognitive load was made by introducing a concurrent task during intentionality attribution, whereas in Study 2, cognitive load was accomplished by associating the dual-task with a time pressure paradigm. Participants under cognitive load were expected to exhibit cognitive resource exhaustion, providing greater judgments of intentionality for negative outcomes and lower for positive ones, due to the dominance of intuition, compared to evaluations provided by participants who were not under cognitive load.
Results:
In both studies, cognitive load reduced intentionality attributions for positive side effects compared to the no-load condition, with response times being longer for positive side effects than for negative ones.
Conclusion:
This pattern suggests System 2 intervention for positive outcomes and System 1 dominance for negative ones. Therefore, introducing cognitive load enabled us to identify the different roles of the two decision systems in intentionality attribution.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Reason and Intuition
High-Level and Low-Level Awareness
Cognitive Learning
E. C. Tolman's theory of purposive behavior emphasizes that much behavior is goal-directed. He argued that to understand behavior, we must look at the entire sequence of actions leading to a goal. For instance, high school students study hard, not just due to past reinforcement but also to achieve the goal of getting into a good college.
Tolman introduced the idea that behavior is influenced by...
Attribution Theory
Cognitive Theories: Schachter-Singer Theory of Emotion
Physiological Arousal and Cognitive Labeling
According to this theory, when an individual experiences...
Language and Cognition

