Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test

  title={Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test},
  author={Maggie E. Toplak and Richard F. West and Keith E. Stanovich},
  journal={Thinking \& Reasoning},
  pages={147 - 168}
The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT; Frederick, 2005) is designed to measure the tendency to override a prepotent response alternative that is incorrect and to engage in further reflection that leads to the correct response. It is a prime measure of the miserly information processing posited by most dual process theories. The original three-item test may be becoming known to potential participants, however. We examined a four-item version that could serve as a substitute for the original. Our… 

Slower is not always better: Response-time evidence clarifies the limited role of miserly information processing in the Cognitive Reflection Test

The authors' analysis focused on people’s response times to CRT items to determine whether predicted associations are evident between miserly thinking and the generation of incorrect, intuitive answers, and indicated only a weak correlation between CRT response times and accuracy.

Investigating an alternate form of the cognitive reflection test

Much research in cognitive psychology has focused on the tendency to conserve limited cognitive resources. The CRT is the predominant measure of such miserly information processing, and also predicts

The false allure of fast lures

The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) allegedly measures the tendency to override the prepotent incorrect answers to some special problems, and to engage in further reflection. A growing literature

The development and testing of a new version of the cognitive reflection test applying item response theory (irt).

The cognitive reflection test (CRT) is a short measure of a person's ability to resist intuitive response tendencies and to produce a normatively correct response, which is based on effortful

Developing A Cognitive Reflection Test for School-Age Children

A version of the cognitive reflection test suitable for elementary-schoolaged children, which could be used to study the emergence of cognitive reflection as well as its role in the development of other forms of higher-order cognition.

Attitude to ambiguity as a predictor of analytic thinking

Thinking dispositions are considered important predictors of analytic thinking. While several thinking dispositions have been found to predict responses on a range of analytic thinking tasks, this

A reflection on cognitive reflection – testing convergent/divergent validity of two measures of cognitive reflection

The aim of the study was to test convergent/discriminant validity of two measures of cognitive reflection, cognitive reflection test (CRT) and belief bias syllogisms (BBS) and to investigate whether

Dunning-Kruger Effect: Intuitive Errors Predict Overconfidence on the Cognitive Reflection Test

Results taken together suggest that participants who perform poorly in the CRT and also those who score higher in intuitive thinking disposition are more susceptible to the influences of heuristic-based cues, such as answer fluency, when judging their performance.

The Development of Cognitive Reflection in China

It is demonstrated that cognitive reflection, rational thinking, and normative thinking dispositions converge even in a culture that emphasizes holistic, nonanalytic reasoning.

Can dual processing theory explain physics students' performance on the Force Concept Inventory?

According to dual processing theory there are two types, or modes, of thinking: system 1, which involves intuitive and nonreflective thinking, and system 2, which is more deliberate and requires



Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making

This paper introduces a three-item "Cognitive Reflection Test" (CRT) as a simple measure of one type of cognitive ability—the ability or disposition to reflect on a question and resist reporting the

Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition

  • Jonathan EvansK. Stanovich
  • Psychology, Biology
    Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science
  • 2013
It is argued that the dual-processing distinction is supported by much recent evidence in cognitive science.

Individual differences in rational thought.

Much research in the last 2 decades has demonstrated that humans deviate from normative models of decision making and rational judgment. In 4 studies involving 954 participants, the authors explored

Constructive thinking: a broad coping variable with specific components.

The patterns of correlations between the CTI scales and the various criteria as well as the factor analysis demonstrated that the construct of constructive thinking is differentiated aswell as integrated.

Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?

In a series of experiments involving most of the classic tasks in the heuristics and biases literature, the implications of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap are examined.

Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition.

This article reviews a diverse set of proposals for dual processing in higher cognition within largely disconnected literatures in cognitive and social psychology and suggests that while some dual-process theories are concerned with parallel competing processes involving explicit and implicit knowledge systems, others are concerns with the influence of preconscious processes that contextualize and shape deliberative reasoning and decision-making.

On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability.

The authors present a framework for predicting when cognitive ability will and will not correlate with a rational thinking tendency, including some of the most classic and well-studied biases in the heuristics and biases literature.

Individual Differences in Numeracy and Cognitive Reflection, with Implications for Biases and Fallacies in Probability Judgment.

The results indicated that the CRT is not just another numeracy scale, that objective and subjective numeracy scales do not measure an identical construct, and that different aspects of numeracy predict different biases and fallacies.

Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking.

A sample of 349 college students completed an argument evaluation test (AET) in which they evaluated arguments concerning real-life situations. A separate regression analysis was conducted for each

The metacognitive advantage of deliberative thinkers: a dual-process perspective on overconfidence.

The results of 7 studies support the hypothesis that deliberative thinkers have a metacognitive advantage over intuitive thinkers: Deliberative thinkers are aware of both the deliberative solution and the intuitive alternative; realizing that the deliberation solution is better, they are likely to feel more confident and be more accurate in how they assess their performance and that of others.