EXAMINING THE ROLE OF FEELING OF RIGHTNESS WITH ANCHORING AND NUMBER OF MODELS

Abstract

Feeling of Rightness (FOR) is a metacognitive experience accompanying people’s intuitive answers that predicts subsequent answer changes (Thompson, Prowse Turner, & Pennycook, 2011). Previous research suggested cues that influence FOR also affect the ease with which an answer comes to mind, namely answer fluency. An issue that remains to be addressed is whether answer fluency drives the effect of FOR on subsequent behaviours pertaining to answer changes. The goal of a series of four experiments was to examine the relationship between FOR, answer fluency, and people’s reanswer choices. Reasoners (N = 64) in each experiment were asked to determine the validity of 32 syllogisms that consisted of two models, single-model and multiple-models. Each syllogism was randomly paired with a question containing either a high anchor value (80% or 90%) or a low anchor value (10% or 20%). Reasoners then provided a FOR rating on a scale from 0 to 100 along with their reanswer choice for the first two experiments. The last two experiments served as the control experiments for which we removed the FOR judgements. Results suggested that influencing FOR without affecting answer fluency had no effect on people’s subsequent reanswer choices. That is, when answers came to mind slowly, FORs were lower and people were more likely to choose to reanswer the problems. Possible explanations and limitations were further discussed in the paper.

Cite this work

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

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 0 citations exist upstream.

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