The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Rationality and the Reflective Mind
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.
Overview
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–400 of 1,002
Value of Information: Exploring Behavioral and Social Factors
Glynn, P. D., Chiavacci, S. J., Rhodes, C. R., HELGESON, J. F., Shapiro, C. D., & Straub, C. L. (2022) · Frontiers in Environmental Science · doi:10.3389/fenvs.2022.805245 · Cited by 19
Root cause analysis of cases involving diagnosis
Graber, M. L., Castro, G. M., Danforth, M., Tilly, J., Croskerry, P., El-Kareh, R. E., Hemmalgarn, C., Ryan, R., Tozier, M., Trowbridge, B., et al. (2024) · Diagnosis · doi:10.1515/dx-2024-0102 · Cited by 18
The Role of Working Memory Capacity in Multiple-Cue Probability Learning
Rolison, J. J., Evans, J. S. B. T., Walsh, C. R., & Dennis, I. (2011) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.559586 · Cited by 19
The emergence of (artificial) emotions from cognitive and neurological processes
Larue, O., Poirier, P., & Nkambou, R. (2013) · Biologically Inspired Cognitive Architectures · doi:10.1016/j.bica.2013.01.001 · Cited by 18
Metacognitive Control of Categorial Neurobehavioral Decision Systems
Foxall, G. R. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00170 · Cited by 18
Zlatkin‐Troitschanskaia, O., Kuhn, C., Brückner, S., & Leighton, J. P. (2019) · International Journal of Testing · doi:10.1080/15305058.2019.1586377 · Cited by 18
De-idealising the educational ideal of critical thinking
Pettersson, H. (2020) · Theory and Research in Education · doi:10.1177/1477878520981303 · Cited by 18
Key Information Processes for Thinking Critically in Data-Rich Environments
Leighton, J. P., Cui, Y. D., & Cutumisu, M. (2021) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2021.561847 · Cited by 18
The effect of source credibility on bullshit receptivity
Ilić, S., & Damnjanović, K. (2021) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3852 · Cited by 18
The Analytic Cognitive Style and Conspiracy Mentality as Predictors of Conspiracy Beliefs
Mikušková, E. B. (2021) · Studia Psychologica · doi:10.31577/sp.2021.02.819 · Cited by 18
APPROPRIATENESS OF TWO INVENTORIES MEASURING INTUITION (THE PID AND THE REI) FOR SLOVAK POPULATION
Mikušková, E. B., Hanák, R., & Čavojová, V. (2015) · Studia Psychologica · doi:10.21909/sp.2015.01.674 · Cited by 18
ANTI-CONSERVATIVE BIAS IN EDUCATION IS REAL — BUT NOT UNJUST
Cholbi, M. J. (2014) · Social Philosophy and Policy · doi:10.1017/s0265052514000181 · Cited by 17
The Limits of Neuroscience in Counseling: A Humanistic Perspective and Proposed Model
Wilkinson, B. D. (2018) · The Journal of Humanistic Counseling · doi:10.1002/johc.12067 · Cited by 17
Two Kinds of Process or Two Kinds of Processing? Disambiguating Dual-Process Theories
Augusto, R. (2023) · Review of Philosophy and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s13164-023-00673-1 · Cited by 17
RETRACTED ARTICLE: The skeptical import of motivated reasoning: A closer look at the evidence
van Doorn, M. (2023) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2023.2276975 · Cited by 20
RetractedThe rationality wars: a personal reflection
Gigerenzer, G. (2024) · Behavioural Public Policy · doi:10.1017/bpp.2024.51 · Cited by 17
Oaksford, M., & Nick Chater, A. (2014) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2013.877401 · Cited by 17
Towards a descriptivist psychology of reasoning and decision making
Evans, J. S. B. T., & Elqayam, S. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x11001440 · Cited by 17
Comparison of experienced vs. novice teachers in cognitive reflection and rationality
Čavojová, V., & Jurkovič, M. (2017) · Studia Psychologica · doi:10.21909/sp.2017.02.733 · Cited by 17
Errors in Veterinary Anesthesia
Ludders, J. W., & McMillan, M. (2016) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119259749 · Cited by 20
How to Think Rationally about World Problems
Stanovich, K. E. (2018) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence6020025 · Cited by 17
Self-citationCognitive Reflection and General Mental Ability as Predictors of Job Performance
Salgado, J. F., Otero, I., & Moscoso, S. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11226498 · Cited by 19
Ricco, R. B. (2015) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy213 · Cited by 16
Capraro, V. (2019) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/432yw · Cited by 17
Djulbegović, B. (2021) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2021.07.025 · Cited by 17
The Preference for Moderation Scale
Drolet, A. L., Luce, M. F., Jiang, L., Rossi, B. C., & Hastie, R. (2020) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1093/jcr/ucaa042 · Cited by 19
Learning to avoid biased reasoning: effects of interleaved practice and worked examples
van Peppen, L. M., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Kolenbrander, S. V., Heijltjes, A. E. G., Janssen, E. M., & van Gog, T. (2021) · Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/20445911.2021.1890092 · Cited by 17
Teaching on video as an instructional strategy to reduce confirmation bias—a pre-registered study
van Brussel, S., Timmermans, M., Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., & PAAS, F. G. W. C. (2021) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-021-09547-4 · Cited by 18
More Thumbs Than Rules: Is Rationality an Exaptation?
Mastrogiorgio, A., Felin, T., Kauffman, S. A., & Mastrogiorgio, M. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.805743 · Cited by 16
Yáñéz, C. S. (2012) · Informal Logic · doi:10.22329/il.v32i1.3536 · Cited by 16
Knauff, M., & Castañeda, L. E. G. (2021) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2021.1990126 · Cited by 15
Cultural orientations and their influence on social behaviour: Catalysation and suppression
Tutić, A. (2022) · Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour · doi:10.1111/jtsb.12334 · Cited by 15
Vierkant, T. (2022) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192894267.001.0001 · Cited by 15
Jedinger, A., & Siegers, P. (2024) · Politics and Religion · doi:10.1017/s1755048324000130 · Cited by 17
Krueger, J. I., Grüning, D. J., Heck, P. R., & Freestone, D. M. (2024) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1080/1047840x.2024.2366766 · Cited by 16
Fear trumps the common good: Psychological antecedents of vaccination attitudes and behaviour
Adamus, M., Čavojová, V., & Mikušková, E. B. (2022) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103606 · Cited by 15
Measuring Intuitive Use: Theoretical Foundations
Reinhardt, D., & Hurtienne, J. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2166204 · Cited by 20
A Visualization Approach to Addressing Reviewer Bias in Holistic College Admissions
Sukumar, P. T., & Metoyer, R. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-95831-6_12 · Cited by 16
Contextual Debiasing and Critical Thinking: Reasons for Optimism
Correia, V. (2018) · Topoi · doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9388-x · Cited by 14
Defining deliberation for dual-process models of reasoning
Neys, W. D. (2025) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-025-00466-6 · Cited by 14
THE DENOMINATOR NEGLECT IN DECISION-MAKING
Mikušková, E. B. (2015) · Studia Psychologica · doi:10.21909/sp.2015.03.698 · Cited by 14
The embodied embedded character of system 1 processing
Bellini-Leite, S. C. (2013) · Mens Sana monographs · doi:10.4103/0973-1229.109345 · Cited by 14
Hozo, I., Tsalatsanis, A., & Djulbegović, B. (2016) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/jep.12676 · Cited by 14
From Disillusion to the Development of Professional Judgment
Albert, M.-N., & Michaud, N. (2016) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/2158244016684372 · Cited by 14
Bambrah, V., Hsu, C., Toplak, M. E., & Eastwood, J. D. (2019) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2019.102812 · Cited by 16
Min, S., Zhang, J., Li, Y., & He, L. (2022) · Language Testing · doi:10.1177/02655322211070990 · Cited by 14
Viator, R. E., Bagley, P. L., Barnes, B. G., & Harp, N. L. (2014) · Behavioral Research in Accounting · doi:10.2308/bria-50803 · Cited by 14
Cognitive Psychological Support for the ADC Model of Moral Judgment
Białek, M., Terbeck, S., & Handley, S. J. (2014) · AJOB Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/21507740.2014.951790 · Cited by 14
Hila, A. (2026) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-025-02426-3 · Cited by 14
Epistemic Agency in the Age of Large Language Models: Design Principles for Knowledge-Building AI
Woodruff, E., & Hewitt, J. (2026) · AI · doi:10.3390/ai7030099 · Cited by 16
The Aim of Belief and the Goal of Truth
Chrisman, M. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192898852.003.0005 · Cited by 13
The Sociocognitive Origins of Personal Mastery
Brett, G., & Dubash, S. (2023) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.1177/00221465231167558 · Cited by 15
The typical and atypical developing mind: a common model
Δημητρίου, Α., Spanoudis, G. C., & Papadopoulos, T. C. (2024) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579424000944 · Cited by 15
A Blind Spot in Research on Foreign Language Effects in Judgment and Decision-Making
Polonioli, A. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00227 · Cited by 13
Confronting White Ignorance: White Psychology and Rational Self‐Regulation
Glazer, T., & Liebow, N. (2020) · Journal of Social Philosophy · doi:10.1111/josp.12349 · Cited by 17
Acting Wisely: Eliminating Negative Bias in Medical Education—Part 1: The Fundamentals
Plews-Ogan, M. L., Bell, T. D., Townsend, G., Canterbury, R. J., & Wilkes, D. S. (2020) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003699 · Cited by 13
No easy fix for belief bias during syllogistic reasoning?
Boissin, E., Caparos, S., & Neys, W. D. (2023) · Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/20445911.2023.2181734 · Cited by 13
Saghai, Y. (2013) · Journal of Medical Ethics · doi:10.1136/medethics-2012-101112 · Cited by 13
When Does Bounded-Optimal Metareasoning Favor Few Cognitive Systems?
Milli, S., Lieder, F., & Griffiths, T. L. (2017) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v31i1.11156 · Cited by 13
Bridging the gap between Bayesian and story-comparison models of juridical inference
Spottswood, E. (2013) · Law Probability and Risk · doi:10.1093/lpr/mgt010 · Cited by 16
Reasoning is for thinking, not just for arguing
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x10002773 · Cited by 13
Evaluating Effort: Influences of Evaluation Mode on Judgments of Task‐specific Efforts
Dunn, T. L., Koehler, D. J., & Risko, E. F. (2017) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2018 · Cited by 15
Osbeck, L. M., & Held, B. S. (2014) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139136419.001 · Cited by 13
Fabio, R. A., Antonietti, A., Iannello, P., & Suriano, R. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1599920 · Cited by 12
Tutić, A., Grehl, S., & Liebe, U. (2023) · European Sociological Review · doi:10.1093/esr/jcad067 · Cited by 12
Flow and intuition: a systems neuroscience comparison
Kotler, S., Parvizi-Wayne, D., Mannino, M., & Friston, K. J. (2025) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niae040 · Cited by 12
Stanovich's arguments against the “adaptive rationality” project: An assessment
Polonioli, A. (2015) · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.12.003 · Cited by 12
Is There a Role for Adversariality in Teaching Critical Thinking?
Bailin, S., & Battersby, M. (2020) · Topoi · doi:10.1007/s11245-020-09713-2 · Cited by 18
Teaching Athletes to Understand Their Attention Is Teaching Them to Concentrate
Oliver, A., McCarthy, P. J., & Burns, L. (2020) · Journal of Sport Psychology in Action · doi:10.1080/21520704.2020.1838980 · Cited by 12
Exploring rationality in schizophrenia
Revsbech, R., Mortensen, E. L., Owen, G. S., Nordgaard, J., Jansson, L., Sæbye, D., Flensborg‐Madsen, T., & Parnas, J. (2015) · BJPsych Open · doi:10.1192/bjpo.bp.115.000224 · Cited by 12
A proposed new psychological model for judgement and decision-making
Wray, C. (2017) · Leadership & Organization Development Journal · doi:10.1108/lodj-06-2015-0120 · Cited by 14
Rusmana, A. N., Roshayanti, F., & Ha, M. (2020) · Asia-Pacific Science Education · doi:10.1163/23641177-bja00001 · Cited by 13
Language Processing at Its Trickiest: Grammatical Illusions and Heuristics of Judgment
Leivada, E. (2020) · Languages · doi:10.3390/languages5030029 · Cited by 12
Enhancing Rationality: Heuristics, Biases, and The Critical Thinking Project
Battersby, M. (2016) · Informal Logic · doi:10.22329/il.v36i2.4662 · Cited by 12
Disruptive evolution: harnessing functional excess, experimentation, and science as tool
Felin, T., & Kauffman, S. (2023) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtad057 · Cited by 11
Swaryandini, G., Graham, J., Griffith, S., Grilo, V., Ruzzante, F., Zhang, X., Yeung, S. K., Mangiarulo, M., Basarkod, G., Ng, C., et al. (2025) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-025-02253-y · Cited by 11
A hypothetico‐deductive theory of science and learning
Kalinowski, S. T., & Pelakh, A. (2023) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.21892 · Cited by 11
Cécillon, F.-X., Mermillod, M., Leys, C., Bastin, H., Lachaux, J.-P., & Shankland, R. (2024) · European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education · doi:10.3390/ejihpe14030034 · Cited by 14
Pamięć i pamiętanie w przestrzeni języka z perspektywy badań lingwistycznych
Czachur, W., & Wójcicka, M. (2021) · Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego eBooks · doi:10.18778/8220-544-2.10 · Cited by 11
Stair Design and User Interaction
Koutamanis, A. (2024) · Architecture · doi:10.3390/architecture4030036 · Cited by 11
Hendijani, R., Ghafourian, F., & Attari, I. (2021) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-021-01459-3 · Cited by 11
Clinical decision making in physical therapy – Exploring the ‘heuristic’ in clinical practice
Walston, Z., Whelehan, D. F., & O’Shea, N. (2022) · Musculoskeletal Science and Practice · doi:10.1016/j.msksp.2022.102674 · Cited by 11
Svedholm‐Häkkinen, A. M., & Kiikeri, M. (2022) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s193029750000913x · Cited by 11
Rudloff, J. P., Hutmacher, F., & Appel, M. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-31079-9 · Cited by 13
Sauer, H. (2023) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781003375753 · Cited by 13
Petersen, M. B., & Arceneaux, K. (2020) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12668 · Cited by 11
Croskerry, P. (2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-6566-8_33 · Cited by 5
Yáñéz, C. S. (2014) · Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación · doi:10.5209/rev_clac.2014.v58.45474 · Cited by 11
A Dual-Process Analysis of Design Idea Generation
Moore, D. J., Sauder, J. F., & Jin, Y. (2014) · ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (IDETC/CIE) · doi:10.1115/detc2014-34657 · Cited by 11
To dive or not to dive in the penalty area? The questionable art of deception in soccer
Sabag, E., Lidor, R., Morgulev, E., Arnon, M., Azar, O. H., & Bar‐Eli, M. (2018) · International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology · doi:10.1080/1612197x.2018.1462100 · Cited by 11
Commentary: Rethinking fast and slow based on a critique of reaction-time reverse inference
Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J. A., Koehler, D. J., & Thompson, V. A. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01174 · Cited by 11
Mindware: Critical Thinking in Everyday Life
Eigenauer, J. D. (2024) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence12020017 · Cited by 10
Choice under uncertainty and cognitive load
Dominiak, A., & Duersch, P. (2024) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/s11166-024-09426-6 · Cited by 10
Intelligence predicts choice in decision-making strategies
Maran, T. K., Ravet‐Brown, T., Angerer, M., Furtner, M. R., & Huber, S. E. (2019) · Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics · doi:10.1016/j.socec.2019.101483 · Cited by 10
Value of Information and Decision Pathways: Concepts and Case Studies
Glynn, P. D., Rhodes, C. R., Chiavacci, S. J., HELGESON, J. F., Shapiro, C. D., & Straub, C. L. (2022) · Frontiers in Environmental Science · doi:10.3389/fenvs.2022.805214 · Cited by 10
15. Cognitive Bias Mitigation: Becoming Better Diagnosticians
Croskerry, P. (2017) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781315116334-15 · Cited by 10
An Interactionist Approach to Cognitive Debiasing
Bland, S. (2020) · Episteme · doi:10.1017/epi.2020.9 · Cited by 10
Analytic Thinking and Political Orientation in the Corona Crisis
Maglić, M., Pavlovic, T. M., & Franc, R. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631800 · Cited by 10
Bilinguals are better than monolinguals in detecting manipulative discourse
Leivada, E., Mitrofanova, N., & Westergaard, M. R. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0256173 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Stanovich, K.
- Corresponding author
- Stanovich, Keith
- ORCID
- Stanovich, Keith
- Venue
- Oxford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2010-12-03
- 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
