The Devil Is in the Deliberation: Thinking Too Much Reduces Preference Consistency

By L. Nordgren, A. Dijksterhuis. 2009

109 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e2cd2c33076854d87ba0a2c55772008e95fe06ed

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. N. Ambady
2. J. Prescott
3. Markus Raab
4. Douglas J. Brown
5. Nicholas O. Rule
6. Juliano Laran
7. Eduardo B. Andrade
8. Anne‐Claire Macquet

In General Decision Sciences

1. A. Dalton
2. Eduardo B. Andrade
3. N. Kwok
4. J. Prescott
5. Markus Raab
6. Douglas J. Brown
7. Franki Y. H. Kung
8. N. Ambady

In Safety Research

1. J. Prescott
2. Markus Raab
3. Douglas J. Brown
4. Juliano Laran

Citations in the corpus

• Are Attention Check Questions a Threat to Scale Validity? (2018, background): “…the prior literature; because attention checks increase deliberation (Hauser & Schwarz, 2015), and deliberation can cause inaccurate or inconsistent responses (e.g. Dijksterhuis et al., 2006; Nordgren & Dijksterhuis, 2009), attention checks would bias survey responses and threaten scale validity.”
• Simple heuristics in sports (2012, background): “More importantly, the generalization of take-the-first across different cross-sectional, longitudinal designs using different sports, paradigms, and expert groups indicates that it is a robust mechanism, one that has also been studied in applications outside sports, such as nursing (Whyte, Ward, & E”
• Multisensory processes in flavour perception and their influence on food choice (2015, result): “Why sensory analysis is ‘antagonistic’ towards affective states in unclear, although this finding is compatible with data from other fields, in particularly the study of attitudes and decision making [42].”
• In Search of Homo Economicus: Cognitive Noise and the Role of Emotion in Preference Consistency (2009, unknown): “…car from a given set of cars made objectively poorer choices (i.e., cars that had significantly fewer positive features) than participants who were distracted for the same amount of time with an anagram-solving task (Dijksterhuis et al. 2006, study 1; see also Nordgren and Dijksterhuis 2009 ).”
• Female sexual orientation is perceived accurately, rapidly, and automatically from the face and its features (2009, background): “For instance, Dijksterhuis and colleagues have shown that non-deliberative judgments can lead to better choices and have illustrated the many benefits of unconscious over conscious thought (e.g., Dijksterhuis et al., 2006; Nordgren & Dijksterhuis, 2009).”
• The Curious Case of Behavioral Backlash: Why Brands Produce Priming Effects and Slogans Produce Reverse Priming Effects (2011, background): “Correction research finds that when consumers encounter a source of unwanted bias, mental processes and behaviors are instigated to correct for its potential influence (Petty, Wegener, and White 1998; Williams, Fitzsimons, and Block 2004; Wilson and Brekke 1994).”