1. Conflict with conjunctions: Metacognition and response times in the Linda problem
Pavle Valerjev
Marin Dujmović
Department of psychology, University of Zadar
Project: 4139

2. Dual process theories
Two types of processing in decision making (Evans & Stanovich, 2013)
Type 1 – intuitive, fast, autonomous, high capacity, low resource cost
Type 2 – analytical, reflexive, slow, high resource cost
Questions?
What is the relationship between Type 1 and Type 2 processing
Parallel?
Type 1  Type 2?
How are Type 2 processes initiated?
Individual differences in analytical thinking, type of instruction, time on task (Evans et al., 2010; Stanovich & West, 2008)

3. Pennycook et al. (2015)

4. Metacognition Metacognitive knowledge & metacognitive processes
Knowledge – strategies & mental processes involved
Processes – monitoring processes  evaluation of accuracy & efficiency
Subjective ratings of confidence & accuracy
On most tasks people have little to no insight into objective accuracy (Shynkaruk & Thompson, 2006)
Level of confidence  fluency, response times, total time on task (Thompson et al., 2011)

5. Metacognition Valerjev & Dujmović (2016) – Conditional reasoning
Valerjev & Dujmović (2016) – Wason selection task
Dujmović & Valerjev (2016) – Stereotypical base-rate task
1. No correlation between confidence ratings and objective accuracy
2. Extremely high confidence ratings
3. A strong negative correlation between response times and confidence ratings

6. Goals
Within the theoretical framework given by Pennycook et al. (2015)
Test whether different levels of conflict lead to differences in confidence ratings and response times
1. Higher levels of induced conflict would lead to slower responses
2. Higher levels of induced conflict + slower responses  Lower confidence ratings

7. Say hello to Linda... Tversky & Kahneman (1982)
Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in anti-nuclear demonstrations.
Which is more probable?
1. Linda is a bank teller
2. Linda is a bank teller and active in the feminist movement

8. Conjunction fallacy
BANK TELLER
FEMINIST
BANK TELLER
&
FEMINIST

9. Conflict with conjunctions
John is a lawyer in a prestigious law firm, and likes to spend his free time on the golf course. V1
1. Has an expensive car
2. Has an expensive car and is a workaholic V2
1. Is a workaholic
2. Is a workaholic and volunteers in the soup kitchen V3
1. Volunteers in the soup kitchen
2. Volunteers in the soup kitchen and writes poetry V4
2. Volunteers in the soup kitchen and he is a workaholic

10. Conflict with conjunctives
V1 – High  High + High  conflict, the conjunction is more representative
V2 – High  High + Low  no conflict, the single option is more representative
V3 – Low  Low + Low  representativeness not a valid heuristic
V4 – Low  Low + High  conflict, the conjunctive is more representative
Predictions based on the model
V1 – conflict – fast response & high confidence
V2 – no conflict – fastest response & highest confidence
V3 – representativeness can not be used – slowest responses and lowest confidence
V4 – conflict – slower responses & lower confidence ratings than V1

11. Method & Materials
Participants – N = 31 – undergraduate psychology students unfamiliar with Linda
Constructed 20 Linda type stories
Each item was presented in every version
Rotated among participants
Option order – in half of the items S + C, the other half C + S
Designed and executed using E-Prime v , on 5 identical PCs

12. Procedure FIXATION CROSS 500 ms STORY Until read WHICH IS MORE
PROBABLE
Until response
CONFIDENCE
RATING

13. Confidence ratings
After each decision participants gave a confidence rating
50% - not confident at all, I was guessing
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% - completely confident

14. Results
% of conjunction answeres

15. Results
Response times (ms)
F(3, 90) = 13.86, p<.01

16. Results
Confidence ratings
F(3, 90) = 13.55, p<.01

17. Results
Item analysis  Are confidence ratings higher for items for which responses where faster?
Correlations between response times and confidence ratings when items appear in:
V1  r = -.50**
V2  r = -.54**
V3  r = -.79**
V4  r = -.72** **p<.01
Confidence was significantly higher for items which had faster responses

18. To conclude
Higher levels of induced conflict decrease confidence and increase response times
Answers to items which were processed faster were rated with higher confidence
There is now convergent evidence using different heuristics as target processes:
Representativeness
Confirmation bias
Stereorypes
It seems conflict detection is a key process for the initialization of Type 2 processes and for metacognitive judgements

19. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION