Cited by 1,157Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsSocial and Intergroup PsychologyMemory Processes and Influences

Mental contamination and mental correction: Unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations.

Wilson, Timothy D., Brekke, Nancy·1994·Psychological Bulletin

Abstract

We define mental contamination as the process whereby a person has an unwanted response because of mental processing that is unconscious or uncontrollable. This type of bias is distinguishable from the failure to know or apply normative rules of inference and can be further divided into the unwanted consequences of automatic processing and source confusion, which is the confusion of 2 or more causes of a response. Mental contamination is difficult to avoid because it results from both fundamental properties of human cognition (e.g., a lack of awareness of mental processes) and faulty lay beliefs about the mind (e.g., incorrect theories about mental biases). People's lay beliefs determine the steps they take (or fail to take) to correct their judgments and thus are an important but neglected source of biased responses. Strategies for avoiding contamination, such as controlling one's exposure to biasing information, are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.116.1.117

Cites

168 of 168 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The extent to which people have introspective access to psychological processes has been disputed.

    “the extent to which people have introspective access to psychological processes has been disputed”

    From Unawareness of Attitudes, Their Environmental Causes, and Their Behavioral Effects (2025) · cites this paper as Wilson & Brekke 1994

  • The cognitive processes that engender psychological biases are thought to be nonconscious and inaccessible to introspection.

    “The cognitive processes that engender psychological biases are thought to be nonconscious and, as such, inaccessible to introspection (Wilson & Brekke, 1994; Wilson et al., 2002).”

    From Everyone I Don’t Like Is Biased: Affective Evaluations and the Bias Blind Spot (2026) · cites this paper as Wilson & Brekke, 1994

  • The cognitive processes that produce many psychological biases are inaccessible to introspection.

    “Given that the cognitive processes that produce many psychological biases are inaccessible to introspection (Wilson & Brekke, 1994; Wilson et al., 2002)”

    From Everyone I Don’t Like Is Biased: Affective Evaluations and the Bias Blind Spot (2026) · cites this paper as Wilson & Brekke, 1994

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 171 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wilson, T. D., & Brekke, N.
Affiliations
University of Virginia (US)
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
1994
Volume
116
Issue
1
Pages
117-142
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W2035370986
Cited by
1,157
References
171
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 45
FWCI
12.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01mh041841-10)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH41841)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
mental contamination, judgment bias, automatic processing, source confusion, unconscious processes, metacognition
MeSH terms
Cognition, Humans, Judgment, Mental Processes

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