Cited by 1,041Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsCognitive Science and Education ResearchClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Rationality and the Reflective Mind

Stanovich, Keith·2010·Oxford University Press eBooks

DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341140.001.0001

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This book attempts to resolve the Great Rationality Debate in cognitive science—the debate about how much irrationality to ascribe to human cognition. It shows how the insights of dual-process theory and evolutionary psychology can be combined to explain why humans are sometimes irrational even though they possess remarkably adaptive cognitive machinery. The book argues that to characterize fully differences in rational thinking, we need to replace dual-process theories with tripartite models of cognition. Using a unique individual differences approach, it shows that the traditional second system (System 2) of dual-process theory must be further divided into the reflective mind and the algorithmic mind. Distinguishing them gives a better appreciation of the significant differences in their key functions: the key function of the reflective mind is to detect the need to interrupt autonomous processing and to begin simulation activities, whereas that of the algorithmic mind is to sustain the processing of decoupled secondary representations in cognitive simulation. The book then uses this algorithmic/reflective distinction to develop a taxonomy of cognitive errors made on tasks in the heuristics and biases literature. It presents the empirical data to show that the tendency to make these thinking errors is not highly related to intelligence. Using a tripartite model of cognition, the book shows how, when both are properly defined, rationality is a more encompassing construct than intelligence, and that IQ tests fail to assess individual differences in rational thought. It then goes on to discuss the types of thinking processes that would be measured if rational thinking were to be assessed as IQ has been.

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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341140.001.0001

Cites

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.

Self-check

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

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

Still being checked.

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 1,002

Intelligence Explosion: Evidence and Import
Muehlhauser, L., & Salamon, A. (2012) · The frontiers collection · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32560-1_2 · Cited by 84
Why humans are (sometimes) less rational than other animals: Cognitive complexity and the axioms of rational choice
Stanovich, K. E. (2012) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2012.713178 · Cited by 86
Self-citation
ED cognition: any decision by anyone at any time
Croskerry, P. (2014) · Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.2310/8000.2013.131053 · Cited by 86
Uncertain deduction and conditional reasoning
Evans, J. S. B. T., Thompson, V. A., & Over, D. E. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00398 · Cited by 80
Mind, rationality, and cognition: An interdisciplinary debate
Chater, N., Felin, T., Funder, D. C., Gigerenzer, G., Koenderink, J. J., Krueger, J. I., Noble, D., Nordli, S. A., Oaksford, M., Schwartz, B. N., et al. (2017) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1333-5 · Cited by 85
Self-citation
The need for intellectual diversity in psychological science: Our own studies of actively open-minded thinking as a case study
Stanovich, K. E., & Toplak, M. E. (2019) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2019.03.006 · Cited by 83
Self-citation
Ideological Asymmetries and the Determinants of Politically Motivated Reasoning
Guay, B., & Johnston, C. D. (2021) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12624 · Cited by 80
Knowledge, Dexterity, and Attention
Fairweather, A., & Montemayor, C. (2017) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316105849 · Cited by 80
The empirical relationship between nonstandard economic behaviors
Dean, M., & Ortoleva, P. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1821353116 · Cited by 78
Cognitive ability and risk aversion: A systematic review and meta analysis
Lilleholt, L. (2019) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500004307 · Cited by 82
The cognitive basis of social behavior: cognitive reflection overrides antisocial but not always prosocial motives
Corgnet, B., Espín, A. M., & Hérnan-Gonzalez, R. (2015) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00287 · Cited by 82
Designing to Debias: Measuring and Reducing Public Managers’ Anchoring Bias
Nagtegaal, R., Tummers, L. G., Noordegraaf, M., & Bekkers, V. (2020) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.13211 · Cited by 83
Motivated ignorance, rationality, and democratic politics
Williams, D. (2020) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-020-02549-8 · Cited by 80
Economic Agents as Imperfect Problem Solvers
Ilut, C., & Valchev, R. (2020) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjac027 · Cited by 79
The Dual-Process Approach to Human Sociality: Meta-analytic evidence for a theory of internalized heuristics for self-preservationPreprint
Capraro, V. (2019) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3409146 · Cited by 74
Factor markets, actors, and affordances
Felin, T., Kauffman, S. A., Mastrogiorgio, A., & Mastrogiorgio, M. (2016) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtv049 · Cited by 75
Many faces of rationality: Implications of the great rationality debate for clinical decision‐making
Djulbegović, B., & Elqayam, S. (2017) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/jep.12788 · Cited by 82
Debunking Arguments in Ethics
Sauer, H. (2018) · doi:10.1017/9781108529181 · Cited by 72
Real‐World Correlates of Performance on Heuristics and Biases Tasks in a Community Sample
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2016) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.1973 · Cited by 76
Self-citation
Bias detection: Response confidence evidence for conflict sensitivity in the ratio bias task
Mevel, K., Poirel, N., Rossi, S., Cassotti, M., Simon, G., Houdé, O., & Neys, W. D. (2014) · Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/20445911.2014.986487 · Cited by 72
Rational decision making in medicine: Implications for overuse and underuse
Djulbegović, B., Elqayam, S., & Dale, W. (2017) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/jep.12851 · Cited by 76
The effect of problem-based learning on cognitive skills in solving geometric construction problems: a case study in Kazakhstan
Tursynkulova, E. A., Madiyarov, N., Sultanbek, T., & Duysebayeva, P. (2023) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2023.1284305 · Cited by 84
Matching bias on the selection task: It's fast and feels good
Thompson, V. A., Evans, J. S. B. T., & Campbell, J. I. D. (2013) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2013.820220 · Cited by 69
Hypergame Theory: A Model for Conflict, Misperception, and Deception
Kovach, N. S., Gibson, A. S., & Lamont, G. B. (2015) · Game Theory · doi:10.1155/2015/570639 · Cited by 68
The inherence heuristic across development: Systematic differences between children’s and adults’ explanations for everyday facts
Cimpian, A., & Steinberg, O. D. (2014) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.09.001 · Cited by 72
Four converging measures of temporal discounting and their relationships with intelligence, executive functions, thinking dispositions, and behavioral outcomes
Basile, A. G., & Toplak, M. E. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00728 · Cited by 67
Why people keep falling for phishing scams: The effects of time pressure and deception cues on the detection of phishing emails
Butavicius, M., Taib, R., & Han, S. (2022) · Computers & security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2022.102937 · Cited by 60
When is rational to order a diagnostic test, or prescribe treatment: the threshold model as an explanation of practice variation
Djulbegović, B., den Ende, J. V., Hamm, R. M., Mayrhofer, T., Hozo, I., Pauker, S. G., & the International Threshold Working Group (ITWG) (2015) · European Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1111/eci.12421 · Cited by 66
Enhancing students’ critical thinking skills: is comparing correct and erroneous examples beneficial?
van Peppen, L. M., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Heijltjes, A. E. G., Janssen, E. M., & van Gog, T. (2021) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-021-09559-0 · Cited by 67
Critical Thinking in Reading Comprehension: Fine Tuning the Simple View of Reading
Paige, D. D., Rupley, W. H., & Ziglari, L. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14030225 · Cited by 81
Examining cognitive development from a conceptual change point of view: The framework theory approach
Vosniadou, S. (2014) · European Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17405629.2014.921153 · Cited by 64
Beyond Two Minds: Cognitive, Embodied, and Evaluative Processes in Creativity
Leschziner, V., & Brett, G. (2019) · Social Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0190272519851791 · Cited by 67
What Intuitions Are… and Are Not
Thompson, V. A. (2013) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-800090-8.00002-0 · Cited by 67
From bias to sound intuiting: Boosting correct intuitive reasoning
Boissin, E., Caparos, S., Raoelison, M., & Neys, W. D. (2021) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104645 · Cited by 72
Cognitive Reflection and the Diligent Worker: An Experimental Study of Millennials
Corgnet, B., Hérnan-Gonzalez, R., & Mateo, R. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0141243 · Cited by 67
Critical Thinking Education and Debiasing (AILACT Essay Prize Winner 2013)
Beaulac, G., & Kenyon, T. (2014) · Informal Logic · doi:10.22329/il.v34i4.4203 · Cited by 67
The Inherence Heuristic as a Source of Essentialist Thought
Salomon, E., & Cimpian, A. (2014) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167214541659 · Cited by 61
Slowing Metaphor Down
Steen, G. J. (2023) · Converging evidence in language and communication research · doi:10.1075/celcr.26 · Cited by 62
Scientific Testimony
Gerken, M. (2022) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198857273.001.0001 · Cited by 60
The limits of the foreign language effect on decision-making: The case of the outcome bias and the representativeness heuristic
Vives, M., Aparici, M., & Costa, A. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0203528 · Cited by 59
(Un)reasonable doubt as affective experience: obsessive–compulsive disorder, epistemic anxiety and the feeling of uncertainty
Vazard, J. (2019) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-019-02497-y · Cited by 58
The Burdens of Proof
Nance, D. A. (2016) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781316415771 · Cited by 58
Knowledge in and out of Contrast
Gerken, M., & Beebe, J. R. (2014) · Noûs · doi:10.1111/nous.12064 · Cited by 56
Clinicians’ Cognitive and Affective Biases and the Practice of Psychotherapy
Yager, J., Kay, J., & Kelsay, K. (2021) · American Journal of Psychotherapy · doi:10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.20200025 · Cited by 60
Four Arguments for Denying that Lottery Beliefs Are Justified
Smith, M. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108379755.006 · Cited by 56
Opportunities to improve ecosystem‐based fisheries management by recognizing and overcoming path dependency and cognitive bias
Fulton, E. A. (2021) · Fish and Fisheries · doi:10.1111/faf.12537 · Cited by 61
How do physicians decide to treat: an empirical evaluation of the threshold model
Djulbegović, B., Elqayam, S., Reljic, T., Hozo, I., Miladinović, B., Tsalatsanis, A., Kumar, A., Beckstead, J. W., Taylor, S. P., & Cannon‐Bowers, J. A. (2014) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/1472-6947-14-47 · Cited by 58
The Crucible of Language
Evans, V. (2015) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781316403631 · Cited by 54
To Shift or Not to Shift? Determinants and Consequences of Phase Shifting on Justice Judgments
Soenen, G., Melkonian, T., & Ambrose, M. L. (2016) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2014.0181 · Cited by 55
Nudging and rationality: What is there to worry?
Engelen, B. (2019) · Rationality and Society · doi:10.1177/1043463119846743 · Cited by 53
The Pandemic of Argumentation
Oswald, S., Lewiński, M., Greco, S., & Villata, S. (2022) · Argumentation library · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91017-4 · Cited by 60
The spur of the moment: what jazz improvisation tells cognitive science
Torrance, S., & Schumann, F. (2018) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-018-0838-4 · Cited by 70
Gender Intensification and Gender Generalization Biases in Pre‐adolescents, Adolescents, and Emerging Adults
Klaczynski, P. A., Felmban, W. S., & Kole, J. A. (2020) · British Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjdp.12326 · Cited by 53
Two minds rationality
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2013) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2013.845605 · Cited by 60
Cyclical dynamics of airline industry earnings
Pierson, K., & Sterman, J. D. (2013) · System Dynamics Review · doi:10.1002/sdr.1501 · Cited by 52
Analytic cognitive style and cognitive ability differentially predict religiosity and social conservatism
Sarıbay, S. A., & Yılmaz, O. (2017) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.03.056 · Cited by 56
Students' Interpretation of Formative Assessment Feedback: Three Claims for Why We Know So Little about Something So Important
Leighton, J. P. (2019) · Journal of Educational Measurement · doi:10.1111/jedm.12237 · Cited by 51
The Intuitive Traditionalist
Eidelman, S., & Crandall, C. S. (2014) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-800284-1.00002-3 · Cited by 54
Evidence-based scientific thinking and decision-making in everyday life
Dawson, C., Julku, H., Pihlajamäki, M., Kaakinen, J. K., Schooler, J. W., & Simola, J. (2024) · Cognitive Research Principles and Implications · doi:10.1186/s41235-024-00578-2 · Cited by 61
Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate an Abuse Prevention Curriculum for Women and Men With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
Hickson, L., Khemka, I., Golden, H., & Chatzistyli, A. (2015) · American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1352/1944-7558-120.6.490 · Cited by 49
Reasoning, Biases and Dual Processes: The Lasting Impact of Wason (1960)
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2014) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.914547 · Cited by 49
Explaining Self-Interested Behavior of Public-Spirited Policymakers
Zamir, E., & Sulitzeanu‐Kenan, R. (2016) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/puar.12825 · Cited by 50
The magical numbers 7 and 4 are resistant to the Flynn effect: No evidence for increases in forward or backward recall across 85 years of data
Gignac, G. E. (2014) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2014.11.001 · Cited by 54
Reasoning to and from belief: Deduction and induction are still distinct
Evans, J. S. B. T., & Over, D. E. (2012) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2012.745450 · Cited by 48
Strategy selection as rational metareasoningPreprint
Lieder, F., & Griffiths, T. L. (2016) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/6yugk · Cited by 48
Belief, Agency, and Knowledge
Chrisman, M. (2022) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192898852.001.0001 · Cited by 50
Thinking, fast and slow on the autism spectrum
Brosnan, M., & Ashwin, C. (2022) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613221132437 · Cited by 55
Perspectives on Diagnostic Failure and Patient Safety
Croskerry, P. (2012) · Healthcare Quarterly · doi:10.12927/hcq.2012.22841 · Cited by 49
Identifying characteristics associated with higher education teachers’ Cognitive Reflection Test performance and their attitudes towards teaching critical thinking
Janssen, E. M., Meulendijks, W., Mainhard, T., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Heijltjes, A. E. G., van Peppen, L. M., & van Gog, T. (2019) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2019.05.008 · Cited by 46
Analytic cognitive style, not delusional ideation, predicts data gathering in a large beads task study
Ross, R. M., Pennycook, G., McKay, R., Gervais, W. M., Langdon, R. A., & Coltheart, M. (2016) · Cognitive Neuropsychiatry · doi:10.1080/13546805.2016.1192025 · Cited by 48
Effects of Self-Explaining on Learning and Transfer of Critical Thinking Skills
van Peppen, L. M., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Heijltjes, A. E. G., Janssen, E. M., Koopmans, D., & van Gog, T. (2018) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00100 · Cited by 45
A rational reinterpretation of dual-process theories
Milli, S., Lieder, F., & Griffiths, T. L. (2021) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104881 · Cited by 49
The challenge of cognitive science for medical diagnosis
Croskerry, P., Campbell, S., & Petrie, D. A. (2023) · Cognitive Research Principles and Implications · doi:10.1186/s41235-022-00460-z · Cited by 51
Dual processes, probabilities, and cognitive architecture
Oaksford, M., & Nick Chater, A. (2012) · Mind & Society · doi:10.1007/s11299-011-0096-3 · Cited by 43
The dual-process turn: How recent defenses of dual-process theories of reasoning fail
Mugg, J. (2015) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2015.1078458 · Cited by 43
Knowledge Attributions and Lottery Cases
Turri, J. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108379755.003 · Cited by 43
Updating, evidence evaluation, and operator availability: A theoretical framework for understanding belief.
Sommer, J., Musolino, J., & Hemmer, P. (2023) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000444 · Cited by 49
The Role of Emotions in Clinical Reasoning and Decision Making
Marcum, J. A. (2013) · The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine · doi:10.1093/jmp/jht040 · Cited by 43
Estrategias argumentativas en niños pequeños: Un estudio a partir de las disputas durante el juego en contextos escolares
Migdalek, M. J., Yáñéz, C. S., & Rosemberg, C. R. (2014) · Revista signos · doi:10.4067/s0718-09342014000300005 · Cited by 42
Evaluation and the Framing of Race
House, E. R. (2017) · American Journal of Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1098214017694963 · Cited by 42
Rational and Emotional Sources of Moral Decision-Making: an Evolutionary-Developmental Account
Denton, K. K., & Krebs, D. L. (2016) · Evolutionary Psychological Science · doi:10.1007/s40806-016-0067-3 · Cited by 43
Dueling with Dual-Process Models: Cognition, Creativity, and Context
Brett, G. (2022) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.1177/07352751221088919 · Cited by 42
Why Choosing Healthy Foods is Hard, and How to Help: Presenting the 4Ps Framework for Behavior Change
Chance, Z., Gorlin, M., & Dhar, R. (2014) · Customer Needs and Solutions · doi:10.1007/s40547-014-0025-9 · Cited by 44
Customer Development, Innovation, and Decision-Making Biases int he Lean Startup
York, J. L., & Danes, J. E. (2014) · Journal of Small Business Strategy · Cited by 41
Creativity and Cognitive Skills among Millennials: Thinking Too Much and Creating Too Little
Corgnet, B., Espín, A. M., & Hérnan-Gonzalez, R. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01626 · Cited by 41
Embracing Paradox: TMT paradoxical processes as a steppingstone between TMT reflexivity and organizational ambidexterity
van Neerijnen, P., Tempelaar, M. P., & van de Vrande, V. (2021) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/01708406211058640 · Cited by 40
Reasoning of State
Rathbun, B. C. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108612937 · Cited by 41
Applying Item Response Theory to Develop a Shortened Version of the Need for Cognition Scale
Chiesi, F., Morsanyi, K., Donati, M. A., & Primi, C. (2018) · Advances in Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.5709/acp-0240-z · Cited by 40
Uncertainty Without All the Doubt
Norby, A. (2015) · Mind & Language · doi:10.1111/mila.12072 · Cited by 40
Intuitive and analytical processes in insight problem solving: a psycho-rhetorical approach to the study of reasoning
Macchi, L., & Bagassi, M. (2012) · Mind & Society · doi:10.1007/s11299-012-0103-3 · Cited by 43
Contributions of Metacognition to Creative Performance and Behavior
Lebuda, I., & Benedek, M. (2024) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/jocb.652 · Cited by 38
Spot the difference: distinguishing between two kinds of processing
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2012) · Mind & Society · doi:10.1007/s11299-012-0104-2 · Cited by 38
Cognitive bias: how understanding its impact on antibiotic prescribing decisions can help advance antimicrobial stewardship
Langford, B. J., Daneman, N., Leung, V., & Langford, D. J. (2020) · JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance · doi:10.1093/jacamr/dlaa107 · Cited by 38
Searching for the cognitive basis of anti-vaccination attitudes
Lindeman, M., Svedholm‐Häkkinen, A. M., & Riekki, T. J. J. (2022) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2022.2046158 · Cited by 39
Evaluation of Physicians’ Cognitive Styles
Djulbegović, B., Beckstead, J. W., Elqayam, S., Reljic, T., Hozo, I., Kumar, A., Cannon‐Bowers, J. A., Taylor, S. P., Tsalatsanis, A., Turner, B., et al. (2014) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x14525855 · Cited by 38
Mentor judgements and decision‐making in the assessment of student nurse competence in practice: A mixed‐methods study
Burden, S., Topping, A. E., & O’Halloran, C. (2017) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.13508 · Cited by 37
Resistance to cognitive biases: Longitudinal trajectories and associations with cognitive abilities and academic achievement across development
Toplak, M. E., & Flora, D. B. (2020) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2214 · Cited by 37
Is data-driven decision-making driven only by data? When cognition meets data
Zaitsava, M., Marku, E., & Guardo, M. C. D. (2022) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2022.01.003 · Cited by 43
Analytic cognitive style predicts paranormal explanations of anomalous experiences but not the experiences themselves: Implications for cognitive theories of delusions
Ross, R. M., Hartig, B., & McKay, R. (2016) · Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2016.08.018 · Cited by 39
Rationalization in Philosophical and Moral Thought
Schwitzgebel, E., & Ellis, J. (2017) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · doi:10.4324/9781315675992-18 · Cited by 36

Authors: Stanovich, K.
Corresponding author: Stanovich, Keith
ORCID: Stanovich, Keith
Venue: Oxford University Press eBooks
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Published: 2010-12-03
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341140.001.0001
OpenAlex: W654145152
Cited by: 1,041
References: 0
Citations by year: 2026: 14 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 95 · 2022: 90 · 2021: 111 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 111 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 65 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 83 · 2014: 55 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 34
FWCI: 16.78
Type: book
Language: en
Open access: closed
Locations: Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics: Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Cognitive Science and Education Research
Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords: rationality, dual-process theory, cognitive simulation, cognitive errors, heuristics and biases, individual differences, intelligence, intelligence testing, System 2, evolutionary psychology

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

Rationality and the Reflective Mind

Abstract

Overview

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Self-check

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks