Research

Spontaneous Evaluations and the Consequences of Intuitive vs. Deliberative Processing

Our research examines the implications of intuitive versus deliberative thinking for both medical and non-medical decisions, finding that deliberative thinking is often not a surefire route to making better decisions, and can instead lead us to be more confident in bad decisions. Other research has shown that deliberative thinking may sometimes be beneficial under certain circumstances, e.g. when people are encouraged to engage in two-sided reasoning and also possess skills relevant to the problem at hand (e.g. numeracy). Currently, we are seeking to determine the role that intuitive vs. deliberative thinking, versus other skills such as numeracy and cognitive flexibility, play in generating judgment errors, unconventional beliefs (e.g. conspiracy theories), and distrust in scientific facts.

The lab also conducts research on spontaneous evaluations; that is, evaluations that come to mind instantly and without effortful thought. Much of this research has examined methodologies for assessing spontaneous evaluations, and how spontaneous evaluations change dramatically depending on the context in which specific objects are observed.

Selected Publications

Consequences of Intuitive vs. Deliberating Processing:

  • Scherer, L.D., Yates, J.F., Baker, S.G. & Valentine, K.D. (2017). The influence of effortful thought and cognitive proficiencies on the conjunction fallacy: Implications for dual process theories of reasoning and judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
  • Scherer, L.D., de Vries, M., Zikmund-Fisher, B.K., Witteman, H.O. & Fagerlin, A (2015). Trust in deliberation: Examining the consequences of deliberative versus intuitive decision strategies in medical treatment decision contexts. Health Psychology, 34, 1090-1099.
  • De Vries, M., Fagerlin, A., Witteman, H. & Scherer, L. D. (2013). Combining deliberation and intuition in patient decision support. Patient Education and Counseling, 91, 154-160.

Priming and Spontaneous Evaluations:

  • VonGunten, C., Bartholow, B., & Scherer, L.D. (in press). Using the P3 to investigate the Affect Misattribution Procedure: Intentional rating, unintentional priming, and contrast effects. Psychophysiology.
  • Scherer, L. D. & Larsen, R. J. (2011) Cross-modal evaluative priming: Emotion sounds influence the processing of emotion words. Emotion, 11, 203-208. Scherer, L. D. & Lambert, A.J. (2012). Implicit race bias revisited: On the utility of task context in assessing implicit racial attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 366-370.
  • Scherer, L. D. & Lambert, A. J. (2009). Contrast effects in priming paradigms: Implications for theory and research on implicit attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 383-403.
  • Scherer, L. D. & Lambert, A. J. (2009). Counterstereotypic exemplars in context: Evidence for intracategory differentiation using implicit measures. Social Cognition, 27, 523-550.