Intuitive confidence: choosing between intuitive and nonintuitive alternatives.

People often choose intuitive rather than equally valid nonintuitive alternatives. The authors suggest that these intuitive biases arise because intuitions often spring to mind with subjective ease, and the subjective ease leads people to hold their intuitions with high confidence. An investigation of predictions against point spreads found that people predicted intuitive options (favorites) more often than equally valid (or even more valid) nonintuitive alternatives (underdogs). Critically, though, this effect was largely determined by people's confidence in their intuitions (intuitive confidence). Across naturalistic, expert, and laboratory samples (Studies 1-3), against personally determined point spreads (Studies 4-11), and even when intuitive confidence was manipulated by altering irrelevant aspects of the decision context (e.g., font; Studies 12 and 13), the authors found that decreasing intuitive confidence reduced or eliminated intuitive biases. These findings indicate that intuitive biases are not inevitable but rather predictably determined by contextual variables that affect intuitive confidence.

[1]  Christopher K. Hsee Attribute Evaluability and its Implications for Joint-Separate Evaluation Reversals and Beyond , 2006 .

[2]  Edmund A. Mennis The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies, and Nations , 2006 .

[3]  N. Epley,et al.  The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic , 2006, Psychological science.

[4]  A. Todorov,et al.  Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes , 2005, Science.

[5]  Justin Kruger,et al.  Counterfactual thinking and the first instinct fallacy. , 2005, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

[6]  N. Epley,et al.  Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment. , 2004, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  Steven D. Levitt,et al.  Why are Gambling Markets Organized so Differently from Financial Markets? , 2004 .

[8]  Thomas Gilovich,et al.  Are Adjustments Insufficient? , 2004, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[9]  Tai Gyu Kim,et al.  Myopic social prediction and the solo comparison effect. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

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

[11]  Justin Kruger,et al.  The influence of egocentrism and focalism on people's optimism in competitions: when what affects us equally affects me more. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[12]  J. Simmons,et al.  Distinguishing the cognitive and behavioral consequences of attitude importance and certainty: A new approach to testing the common-factor hypothesis , 2003 .

[13]  F. Strack,et al.  An inferential approach to the knew-it-all-along phenomenon , 2003, Memory.

[14]  R. Petty,et al.  Ease of Retrieval Effects in Persuasion: A Self-Validation Analysis , 2002 .

[15]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment , 2002 .

[16]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. , 2002 .

[17]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  Risk as Feelings , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[18]  K. Stanovich,et al.  Heuristics and Biases: Individual Differences in Reasoning: Implications for the Rationality Debate? , 2002 .

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choices, Values, and Frames , 2000 .

[20]  James Jeffries,et al.  The Book On Bookies: An Inside Look At A Successful Sports Gambling Operation , 2000 .

[21]  T. Gilovich,et al.  The spotlight effect in social judgment: an egocentric bias in estimates of the salience of one's own actions and appearance. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[22]  J. Kruger,et al.  Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[23]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Judgments of Truth , 1999, Consciousness and Cognition.

[24]  J. Kruger Lake Wobegon be gone! The "below-average effect" and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  Forming Judgments of Attitude Certainty, Intensity, and Importance: The Role of Subjective Experiences , 1999 .

[26]  T. Gilovich,et al.  The illusion of transparency: biased assessments of others' ability to read one's emotional states. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[27]  J. Gandar,et al.  Informed Traders and Price Variations in the Betting Market for Professional Basketball Games , 1998 .

[28]  Stephen Gray,et al.  Testing market efficiency: Evidence from the NFL sports betting market , 1997 .

[29]  S. Epstein,et al.  The Generality of the Ratio-Bias Phenomenon , 1995 .

[30]  Efrat Neter,et al.  The effect of motivation of judgment depends on the difficulty of the judgment. , 1995 .

[31]  S. Epstein Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. , 1994, The American psychologist.

[32]  G. W. Fischer,et al.  Strategy compatibility, scale compatibility, and the prominence effect. , 1993 .

[33]  D. S. Lindsay,et al.  Remembering Mistaken for Knowing: Ease of Retrieval as a Basis for Confidence in Answers to General Knowledge Questions , 1993 .

[34]  F. Strack,et al.  Proprioceptive Determinants of Emotional and Nonemotional Feelings , 1993 .

[35]  A. Tversky,et al.  Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty , 1992 .

[36]  S Epstein,et al.  Cognitive-experiential self-theory and subjective probability: further evidence for two conceptual systems. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[37]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion , 1992 .

[38]  A. Tversky,et al.  The weighing of evidence and the determinants of confidence , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[39]  I. Simonson,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF ANTICIPATING REGRET AND RESPONSIBILITY ON PURCHASE DECISIONS , 1992 .

[40]  Albert V. Carron,et al.  The Home Advantage In Sport Competitions: A Literature Review , 1992 .

[41]  Maurry Tamarkin,et al.  The degree of inefficiency in the football betting market: Statistical tests , 1991 .

[42]  D. Gilbert How mental systems believe. , 1991 .

[43]  I. Simonson,et al.  Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects , 1989 .

[44]  R. Dawes,et al.  Heuristics and Biases: Clinical versus Actuarial Judgment , 2002 .

[45]  A. Tversky,et al.  Contingent weighting in judgment and choice , 1988 .

[46]  D. Gilbert,et al.  On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. , 1988 .

[47]  R. Gottlieb,et al.  The New Yorker , 1987 .

[48]  D. Gill Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 1987 .

[49]  E. E. Jones,et al.  Perceiver-Induced Constraint: Interpretations of Self-Generated Reality , 1986 .

[50]  A. Tversky,et al.  Evidential impact of base rates , 1981 .

[51]  P. Slovic Choice Between Equally Valued Alternatives. , 1975 .

[52]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[53]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2007 .

[54]  Siobhan Chapman Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[55]  R. Dhar,et al.  The Effect of Preference Fluency on Consumer Decision Making , 2004 .

[56]  N. Schwarz Metacognitive Experiences in Consumer Judgment and Decision Making , 2004 .

[57]  Koleman S. Strumpf,et al.  Illegal Sports Bookmakers , 2003 .

[58]  K. Scherer,et al.  Handbook of affective sciences. , 2003 .

[59]  D. Gilbert Heuristics and Biases: Inferential Correction , 2002 .

[60]  Michaela Wänke,et al.  The effects of subjective ease of retrieval on attitudinal judgments : The moderating role of processing motivation , 2000 .

[61]  Joseph P. Forgas,et al.  The Message Within : The Role of Subjective Experience In Social Cognition And Behavior , 2000 .

[62]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. , 1999 .

[63]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Dual-process theories in social psychology , 1999 .

[64]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. , 1999 .

[65]  Michael A. Becker Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles , 1998 .

[66]  G. Clore,et al.  Feelings and phenomenal experiences , 1996 .

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

[68]  E. Higgins,et al.  Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. , 1996 .

[69]  R. Petty,et al.  Attitude strength: An overview. , 1995 .

[70]  R. Petty,et al.  Attitude strength : antecedents and consequences , 1995 .

[71]  S. Epstein,et al.  Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: when people behave against their better judgment. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[72]  A. Tversky,et al.  Preference and belief: Ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty , 1991 .

[73]  M. Tamarkin,et al.  The degree of inefficiencyin the football betting market , 1991 .

[74]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion , 1986, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.

[75]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  The need for cognition. , 1982 .

[76]  A. Tversky,et al.  Causal Schemata in Judgments under Uncertainty , 1982 .

[77]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[78]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  Social Roles, Social Control and Biases in Social Perception , 1977 .

[79]  B. Fischoff Hindsight (Not Equal To) Foresight: The Effect of Outcome Knowledge on Judgment Under Uncertainty. , 1975 .

[80]  H. Kelley The processes of causal attribution. , 1973 .

[81]  V. A. Harris,et al.  The Attribution of Attitudes , 1967 .