Self-Regulation of Cognitive Inference and Decision Processes
Abstract
Mechanisms for controlling inference processes are analyzed according to the models of intuitive scientist (who desires optimal, accurate conclusions) and intuitive lawyer (who desires predetermined, particular conclusions), using a step model of the inference process. The first step, gathering evidence, can be regulated by moving the termination point and by looking in particular places for evidence. The second step, drawing immediate implications from bits of evidence, is presumably automatic and hence relatively immune to regulation. The third step, assessing implications, can override or discredit implications of specific pieces of evidence, and it can be used to regulate inference through combating bias or through attacking and discrediting unwanted implications. The final step, involving integration of assorted evidence and implications, can be regulated by manipulating decision rules and criteria.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Affective reactions are generated quickly and automatically and guide how people attend to, encode, and interpret various events.
“Affective reactions are generated quickly and automatically (Bargh et al., 1992; Zajonc, 1980), and guide how people attend to, encode, and interpret various events (Baumeister & Newman, 1994).”
From Everyone I Don’t Like Is Biased: Affective Evaluations and the Bias Blind Spot (2026) · cites this paper as Baumeister & Newman, 1994
Cites
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241 · see citing works
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317 · see citing works
The case for motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 · Cited by 9,022 · see citing works
On the psychology of prediction.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0034747 · Cited by 6,202 · see citing works
Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components
Devine, P. G. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5 · Cited by 5,673 · see citing works
Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., & Hubbard, M. (1975) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.5.880 · Cited by 1,052 · see citing works
Dunning, D., Meyerowitz, J. A., & Holzberg, A. D. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1082 · Cited by 758 · see citing works
The dilution effect: Nondiagnostic information weakens the implications of diagnostic information
Nisbett, R. E., Zukier, H., & Lemley, R. E. (1981) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(81)90010-4 · Cited by 605 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.
Haidt, J. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.4.814 · Cited by 8,048 · see citing works
Flawed Self-Assessment: Implications for Health, Education, and the Workplace
Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x · Cited by 1,865 · see citing works
Explainable machine learning for scientific insights and discoveries
Roscher, R., Bohn, B., Duarte, M. F., & Garcke, J. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2976199 · Cited by 1,040 · see citing works
The Partisan Brain: An Identity-Based Model of Political Belief
Van Bavel, J. J., & Pereira, A. (2018) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.004 · Cited by 743 · see citing works
MOTIVATED SKEPTICISM IN THE EVALUATION OF POLITICAL BELIEFS (2006)
Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2012) · Critical Review · doi:10.1080/08913811.2012.711019 · Cited by 760 · see citing works
The Effects of Negativity and Motivated Information Processing During a Political Campaign
Meffert, M. F., Chung, S., Joiner, A. J., Waks, L., & Garst, J. (2006) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00003.x · Cited by 305 · see citing works
Saying no to unwanted thoughts: Self-focus and the regulation of mental life.
Macrae, C. N., Bodenhausen, G. V., & Milne, A. B. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.578 · Cited by 171 · see citing works
The Emotional Dog and Its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment
Haidt, J. (2008) · Reasoning · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511814273.055 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Everyone I Don’t Like Is Biased: Affective Evaluations and the Bias Blind Spot
Walker, A. C., Collins, R. N., Walker, H. E. K., Fugelsang, J. A., & Mandel, D. R. (2026) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/01461672261439247 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Baumeister, R. F., & Newman, L. S.
- Affiliations
- Case Western Reserve University (US)
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1994-02
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-19
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2113251444
- Cited by
- 292
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 14.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- cognitive inference, decision-making, self-regulation, evidence collection, discrediting, decision rules
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
