ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Beyond the Surface: A New Perspective on Dual-System Theories in Decision-Making.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
- Intensive care physicians' experiences of decision fatigue and characteristics of vulnerable clinical decisions.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Educational Frameworks for Diagnostic Decision-Making in AI-Enhanced Head and Neck Pathology.Head and neck pathology · 2026Review
- Cognitive Reflection Enhances Rationality Without Changing the Underlying Cognitive Processes.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- "Existential Vacuum" and Axiological Conflict as Correlates of Cognitive-Affective Dissociation in Medical Staff Attitudes Toward Oncofertility in the Pediatric Population-A Preliminary Report.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Experiential Processing and Consumer Loyalty Behavior: The Moderating Role of Cognitive Value Evaluation in Peruvian Consumer Markets.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Intuitive and deliberate decisions can be accounted for by the same cognitive process model.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Unlearning prohibition: the de-implementation of HIV breastfeeding restrictions in the United States.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- The effect of peer relationships on academic burnout among rural left-behind children: a chain mediating effect of social support and cognitive reappraisal.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Collective self-justification and resistance to integration: behavioral and social mechanisms within the Israeli ultra-orthodox community.Frontiers in sociology · 2026Article
- The impact of regular physical exercise on mobile phone addiction tendency among Chinese college students: the mediating role of trait boredom and the moderating role of self-control.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current paper provides a critical evaluation of the dual-system approach in cognitive psychology. This evaluation challenges traditional classifications that associate intuitive processes solely with noncompensatory models and deliberate processes with compensatory ones. Instead, it suggests a more nuanced framework where intuitive and deliberate characteristics coexist within both compensatory and noncompensatory processes. This refined understanding of dual-process models has significant implications for improving theoretical models of decision-making, providing a more comprehensive account of the cognitive mechanisms underlying human judgment and choice.
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.