Implicit Conflict Detection During Decision Making

Popular dual process theories of reasoning and decision making have characterized human thinking as an interplay of an intuitive and analytic reasoning process. Although monitoring the output of the two systems for conflict is crucial to avoid decision making errors there are some widely different views on the efficiency of the process. Kahneman (2002) claims that the monitoring of the intuitive system is typically quite lax whereas others such as Sloman (1996) and Epstein (1994) claim it is flawless and people typically experience a struggle between what they “know” and “feel” in case of a conflict. The present study contrasted these views. Participants solved classic base rate neglect problems while thinking aloud. Verbal protocols showed no evidence for an explicitly experienced conflict. As Kahneman predicted, participants hardly ever mentioned the base rates and seemed to base their judgment exclusively on heuristic reasoning. However, a more implicit measure of conflict detection based on participants’ retrieval of the base rate information in an unannounced recall test showed that the base rates had been thoroughly processed. Results indicate that although the popular characterization of conflict detection as an actively experienced struggle needs to be revised there is nevertheless evidence for Sloman and Epstein’s basic claim about the flawless operation of the conflict monitoring process.