ArticleBehavior research methods2023
How to activate intuitive and reflective thinking in behavior research? A comprehensive examination of experimental techniques.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of cognitive load, ego depletion, induction and time restriction on moral judgments about sacrificial dilemmas: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Pooled it
- Behaviourally-Informed Two-Way Text Messaging to Improve Return to HIV Care in South Africa: Evidence from a Randomised Controlled Trial.AIDS and behavior · 2025Trial
- COVID vaccination and economic game decisions: The role of analytical thinking.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Stable intuition and the rise of deliberative prosociality in childhood.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- Intuitive and deliberate decisions can be accounted for by the same cognitive process model.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- When Fast Thinking Meets Bad Emotion: The Effect of Intuitive Processing Modes and Negative Moods on Moral Hypocrisy.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Reflective thinking predicts disbelief in God across 19 countries.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Humans and LLMs rate deliberation as superior to intuition on complex reasoning tasks.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Easy-fix attentional focus manipulation boosts the intuitive and deliberate use of base-rate information.Memory & cognition · 2025Article
- (State) empathy: how context matters.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Experiments comparing intuitive and reflective decisions provide insights into the cognitive foundations of human behavior. However, the relative strengths and weaknesses of the frequently used experimental techniques for activating intuition and reflection remain unknown. In a large-scale preregistered online experiment (N = 3667), we compared the effects of eight reflection, six intuition, and two within-subjects manipulations on actual and self-reported measures of cognitive performance. Compared to the overall control, the long debiasing training was the most effective technique for increasing actual reflection scores, and the emotion induction was the most effective technique for increasing actual intuition scores. In contrast, the reason and the intuition recall, the reason induction, and the brief time delay conditions failed to achieve the intended effects. We recommend using the debiasing training, the decision justification, or the monetary incentives technique to activate reflection, and the emotion induction, the cognitive load, or the time pressure technique to activate intuition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.