Articlehybrid2016

Scrutinizing the Emotional Nature of Intuitive Coherence Judgments

Thea Zander-Schellenberg · Ana Lucia Fernandez Cruz · Martin P. Winkelmann · Kirsten G. Volz

12 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Behavioral Decision Making

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies Cognitive Science and Education Research

Abstract

Abstract Dual‐system models propose that cognitive processing can occur either intuitively or deliberately. Unlike deliberate decision strategies, intuitive ones are assumed to have an emotional component attached to the decision process. We tested if intuitive decisions are indeed accompanied by an emotional response while deliberate decisions are not. Specifically, we conducted a psychophysiological study in which participants were instructed to decide either intuitively or deliberately if three simultaneously presented words were semantically coherent or incoherent (triad task). The degree of emotionality of these two decision strategies (intuitive vs. deliberate) was compared using changes in electrodermal activity (EDA) and the reaction time (RT) effect of an affective priming paradigm as primary measurements. Based on a valence‐arousal model, our results revealed that intuitive and deliberate judgments do not differ as to their emotionalvalencebut that they do differ in emotionalarousal. Most notably, sympathetic activation during intuitive judgments was significantly lower compared to sympathetic activation during deliberate judgments. Our results reflect that a relaxed state of mind—manifested in low sympathetic activity—could underlie the holistic processing that is assumed to facilitate the proliferation of semantic associations during coherence judgments. This suggests that coherence judgments made under an (instructed) intuitive decision mode have a specific psychophysiological signature and that arousal is the differentiating component between intuitive and deliberate decision strategies. © 2016 The Authors Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

References

1980A circumplex model of affect.2011Thinking, Fast and Slow 2003Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics 2005International affective picture system (IAPS) : affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual 1983Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states.1997Social psychology: handbook of basic principles 2000Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?2013Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition

Cited by

2019Cultural essentialism and tailored hotel service for Chinese: the moderating role of satisfaction 2022Assessing the Core Variables of Business Managers’ Intuitive Decision Ability: A Review and Analysis 2025Reasoning does hurt: deliberation is associated with heightened levels of doubt

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.