Eye tracking and the cognitive reflection test: evidence for intuitive correct responding and uncertain heuristic responding

Zoe A. Purcell*, Stephanie Howarth, Colin A. Wastell, Andrew J. Roberts, Naomi Sweller

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) has been used in thousands of studies across several fields of behavioural research. The CRT has fascinated scholars because it commonly elicits incorrect answers despite most respondents possessing the necessary knowledge to reach the correct answer. Traditional interpretations of CRT performance asserted that correct responding was the result of corrective reasoning involving the inhibition and correction of the incorrect response and incorrect responding was an indication of miserly thinking without feelings of uncertainty. Recently, however, these assertions have been challenged. We extend this work by employing novel eye-tracking techniques to examine whether people use corrective cognitive pathways to reach correct solutions, and whether heuristic respondents demonstrate gaze-based signs of uncertainty. Eye movements suggest that correct responding on the CRT is the result of intuitive not corrective cognitive pathways, and that heuristic respondents show signs of gaze-based uncertainty.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)348–365
    Number of pages18
    JournalMemory & Cognition
    Volume50
    Issue number2
    Early online date13 Aug 2021
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Feb 2022

    Keywords

    • cognitive reflection test
    • dual process
    • eye tracking
    • conflict
    • uncertainty

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Eye tracking and the cognitive reflection test: evidence for intuitive correct responding and uncertain heuristic responding'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this