Has the Standard Cognitive Reflection Test Become a Victim of Its Own Success?

被引:62
作者
Haigh, Matthew [1 ]
机构
[1] Northumbria Univ, Dept Psychol, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE1 8ST, Tyne & Wear, England
关键词
Cognitive Reflection Test; CRT; bat and ball problem; validity; test security; CONSEQUENCES;
D O I
10.5709/acp-0193-5
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) is a hugely influential problem solving task that measures individual differences in the propensity to reflect on and override intuitive (but incorrect) solutions. The validity of this three-item measure depends on participants being naive to its materials and objectives. Evidence from 142 volunteers recruited online suggests this is often not the case. Over half of the sample had previously seen at least one of the problems, predominantly through research participation or the media. These participants produced substantially higher CRT scores than those without prior exposure (2.36 vs. 1.48), with the majority scoring at ceiling level. Participants that had previously seen a specific problem (e.g., the bat and ball problem) nearly always solved that problem correctly. These data suggest the CRT may have been widely invalidated. As a minimum, researchers must control for prior exposure to the three problems and begin to consider alternative, extended measures of cognitive reflection.
引用
收藏
页码:145 / 149
页数:5
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]   Nonnaivete among Amazon Mechanical Turk workers: Consequences and solutions for behavioral researchers [J].
Chandler, Jesse ;
Mueller, Pam ;
Paolacci, Gabriele .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2014, 46 (01) :112-130
[2]  
Cohen J, 1988, STAT POWER ANAL BEVA, DOI DOI 10.1016/B978-0-12-179060-8.50006-2
[3]   Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition [J].
Evans, Jonathan St. B. T. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 59 :255-278
[4]   Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition: Advancing the Debate [J].
Evans, Jonathan St B. T. ;
Stanovich, Keith E. .
PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2013, 8 (03) :223-241
[5]   Cognitive reflection and decision making [J].
Frederick, S .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2005, 19 (04) :25-42
[6]  
Kahneman D., 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow
[7]   Everyday Consequences of Analytic Thinking [J].
Pennycook, Gordon ;
Fugelsang, Jonathan A. ;
Koehler, Derek J. .
CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2015, 24 (06) :425-432
[8]   The Development and Testing of a New Version of the Cognitive Reflection Test Applying Item Response Theory (IRT) [J].
Primi, Caterina ;
Morsanyi, Kinga ;
Chiesi, Francesca ;
Donati, Maria Anna ;
Hamilton, Jayne .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, 2016, 29 (05) :453-469
[9]  
Stewart N, 2015, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V10, P479
[10]  
Thomson KS, 2016, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V11, P99