Cited by 492Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsCognitive Science and Education Research

Associative processes in intuitive judgment

Open access
Morewedge, Carey K., Kahneman, Daniel·2010·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

Dual-system models of reasoning attribute errors of judgment to two failures: the automatic operations of a 'System 1' generate a faulty intuition, which the controlled operations of a 'System 2' fail to detect and correct. We identify System 1 with the automatic operations of associative memory and draw on research in the priming paradigm to describe how it operates. We explain how three features of associative memory--associative coherence, attribute substitution and processing fluency--give rise to major biases of intuitive judgment. Our article highlights both the ability of System 1 to create complex and skilled judgments and the role of the system as a source of judgment errors.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2010.07.004

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [3]Evans JSBT Frankish K In two minds 2009 Oxford University Press Oxford
  2. [17]Keltner D Lerner JS Gilbert D Fiske S Lindsey G Emotion. The Handbook of social psychology 2010 327 352 McGraw Hill New York 5th edition

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morewedge, C. K., & Kahneman, D.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
Corresponding author
Morewedge, Carey K.
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-10
Volume
14
Issue
10
Pages
435-440
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2162915529
Cited by
492
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 12
FWCI
0.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (P30AG024928, P30 AG24928, P30AG034546)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Cognitive Science and Education Research
Keywords
dual-process models, System 1, System 2, intuitive judgment, associative memory, priming, attribute substitution, processing fluency, decision bias, automated reasoning
MeSH terms
Humans, Judgment, Memory, Problem Solving, Psychological Theory, Intuition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review