Concurrent explanations can enhance visual decision making.

The verbalization of one's thoughts has been shown to impair judgment and decision making in some cases, particularly when targets are perceptual. This finding has been attributed to the fact that non-verbal processes are sometimes difficult to verbalize, which may cause a shift in processing that is maladaptive to the task. The study shows that concurrent written explanations can also enhance judgment and decision making in certain visual choice tasks. This finding suggests that the effect of verbalization on perceptual tasks is not dependent on whether the targets of the judgment are verbal or perceptual but rather on whether there is adequate vocabulary to execute the task and whether the task benefits from a more analytic approach.

[1]  Jonathan Evans.  Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. , 2008, Annual review of psychology.

[2]  S. Sloman.  The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. , 1996 .

[3]  T. Chartrand,et al.  THE UNBEARABLE AUTOMATICITY OF BEING , 1999 .

[4]  Eldar Shafir,et al.  Reason-based choice , 1993, Cognition.

[5]  D. Kahneman.  A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. , 2003, The American psychologist.

[6]  Marius Usher,et al.  The Impact of the Mode of Thought in Complex Decisions: Intuitive Decisions are Better , 2011, Front. Psychol..

[7]  K. Stanovich,et al.  Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? , 2000, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[8]  J. Schooler,et al.  Perceptual and conceptual training mediate the verbal overshadowing effect in an unfamiliar domain , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[9]  A certain Je Ne Sais Quoi: Verbalization bias in evaluation , 2005 .

[10]  Peter McGeorge,et al.  The effects of concurrent verbalization on performance in a dynamic systems task , 1989 .

[11]  R. Baumeister,et al.  Toward a Physiology of Dual-Process Reasoning and Judgment: Lemonade, Willpower, and Expensive Rule-Based Analysis , 2008, Psychological science.

[12]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Thinking too much: introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: I , 1977 .

[14]  N. S. Fagley,et al.  The Effects of Framing, Problem Variations, and Providing Rationale on Choice , 1991 .

[15]  R. Gagne,et al.  A study of the effects of verbalization on problem solving. , 1962, Journal of experimental psychology.

[16]  A. Chernev,et al.  Perceptual Focus Effects in Choice , 2007 .

[17]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. , 1977 .

[18]  S. Epstein,et al.  Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[19]  Petter Johansson,et al.  Failure to Detect Mismatches Between Intention and Outcome in a Simple Decision Task , 2005, Science.

[20]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  Modeling Option and Strategy Choices with Connectionist Networks: Towards an Integrative Model of Automatic and Deliberate Decision Making , 2008, Judgment and Decision Making.

[21]  Michael P. Kaschak,et al.  Conscious thought is for facilitating social and cultural interactions: how mental simulations serve the animal-culture interface. , 2010, Psychological review.

[22]  Jonathan Evans.  The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[23]  Jonathan W. Schooler,et al.  Verbalization produces a transfer inappropriate processing shift. , 2002 .

[24]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Introspecting about Reasons can Reduce Post-Choice Satisfaction , 1993 .

[25]  A. Dijksterhuis.  Think different: the merits of unconscious thought in preference development and decision making. , 2004, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[26]  K. Vohs,et al.  Do conscious thoughts cause behavior? , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[27]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention. , 1977 .

[28]  Jukka Häkkinen,et al.  Evaluating the multivariate visual quality performance of image-processing components , 2008, TAP.

[29]  H. A. David,et al.  The method of paired comparisons , 1966 .

[30]  P. Tetlock,et al.  Accounting for the effects of accountability. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[31]  Jukka Häkkinen,et al.  Content and quality: Interpretation-based estimation of image quality , 2008, TAP.

[32]  D. Wegner,et al.  Apparent mental causation. Sources of the experience of will. , 1999, The American psychologist.

[33]  C. Buss,et al.  Children's Brain Development Benefits from Longer Gestation , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[34]  Leif Stinessen,et al.  The influence of verbalization on problem‐solving , 1985 .

[35]  J. Dessalles,et al.  Arguing, reasoning, and the interpersonal (cultural) functions of human consciousness , 2011, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[36]  Jonathan W. Schooler,et al.  Why do words hurt? Content, process, and criterion shift accounts of verbal overshadowing , 2008 .

[37]  Winston R. Sieck,et al.  Exposition Effects on Decision Making: Choice and Confidence in Choice , 1997 .

[38]  Gordon E. Legge,et al.  Spatial learning and navigation using a virtual verbal display , 2010, TAP.

[39]  T. Pearson,et al.  Direct comparison of the efficacy of intuitive and analytical cognition in expert judgment , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[40]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Mindful judgment and decision making. , 2009, Annual review of psychology.

[41]  M. F. Luce,et al.  Constructive Consumer Choice Processes , 1998 .

[42]  T. Wilson.  Knowing When To Ask Introspection and the Adaptive Unconscious , 2003 .

[43]  A. Glöckner,et al.  Multiple-reason decision making based on automatic processing. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[44]  P. Slovic,et al.  When does explicit justification impair decision making , 2000 .

[45]  M. Usher,et al.  Pitting intuitive and analytical thinking against each other: The case of transitivity , 2013, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[46]  Mark C. Fox,et al.  Do procedures for verbal reporting of thinking have to be reactive? A meta-analysis and recommendations for best reporting methods. , 2011, Psychological bulletin.