People who think intuitively are more likely to ascribe a weird event to the paranormal, according to a recent paper in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Those who are more inclined to analytical thinking, on the other hand, think a weird experience can be explained by random chance.
This research is based on a school of thought that suggests people have two available “cognitive routes.” We can process information using fast, automatic, intuitive thinking, or rethink our initial impulses using a conscious, slower, and more reflective route. People’s inclination to focus on one or other of these routes is tested using the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), which uses questions with an obvious (but incorrect answer), and a less obvious, correct solution. The right answer can be reached by tapping into the slower, more analytical thinking system.
Source: ars technica
This research is based on a school of thought that suggests people have two available “cognitive routes.” We can process information using fast, automatic, intuitive thinking, or rethink our initial impulses using a conscious, slower, and more reflective route. People’s inclination to focus on one or other of these routes is tested using the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), which uses questions with an obvious (but incorrect answer), and a less obvious, correct solution. The right answer can be reached by tapping into the slower, more analytical thinking system.
Source: ars technica
Comments
Post a Comment