Multilingual AI translation:

Dual-process theory

Leave a comment

Dual process theory in psychology suggests that thinking operates via two distinct systems: an implicit system, which is automatic and unconscious, and an explicit system, which is controlled and conscious. Explicit attitudes and behaviors can be modified relatively quickly through persuasion or education, whereas implicit attitudes usually take longer to change and often require the establishment of new habits. These theories are central to various branches of psychology, including social, personality, cognitive, and clinical psychology. They also intersect with economics, especially in the contexts of prospect theory and behavioral economics, and are gaining prominence in sociological studies through cultural analysis.

* * *

Dual-process models of cognition: A multifarious nomenclature (or a terminological pandemonium)

  • automatic vs. controlled (Kahneman, 2003)
  • associative vs. rule based (Sloman, 1996)
  • heuristic vs. analytic (Klaczynski, 2001)
  • personal vs. subpersonal (Frankish, 2009)
  • analogue vs. symbolic (Paivio, 1986)
  • reflexive vs. reflective (Lieberman et al., 2002)
  • heuristic vs. systematic (Chaiken, 1980)
  • peripheral vs. central (Petty & Cacioppo, 1981)
  • implicit vs. explicit (Greenwald et al., 1998)
  • automatic vs. conscious (Baumeister, 2005)
  • experiential vs. noetic (Strack & Deutsch, 2004)
  • intuitive vs. reflective (Sperber, 1997)
  • associative vs. propositional (Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006)
  • etc. pp.

It has been noted that “what matters is not the specific names but the fact of duality” (Baumeister, 2005, p.75).

Summary of the features attributed to each system

System 1 System 2
  • Evolutionarily old
  • Unconcious, preconcious
  • Shared with animals
  • Implicit knowledge
  • Automatic
  • Fast
  • Parallel
  • High capacity
  • Intuitive
  • Contextualized
  • Pragmatic
  • Associative
  • Independent of general intelligence
  • Evolutionarily recent
  • Concious
  • Uniquely (distinctively) human
  • Explicit knowledge
  • Controlled
  • Slow
  • Sequential
  • Low capacity
  • Reflective
  • Abstract
  • Logical
  • Rule-based
  • Linked to general intelligence

Adapted from Frankish, K. (2009). Systems and levels: Dual-system theorie and the personal-subpersonal distinction. In J. S. B. T. Evans & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (p. 89-108). Oxford: Oxford University Press.


Further References

Groves, P. M., & Thompson, R. F.. (1970). Habituation: A dual-process theory. Psychological Review

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1037/h0029810
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Wixted, J. T.. (2007). Dual-process theory and signal-detection theory of recognition memory. Psychological Review

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.152
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Greene, J. D.. (2009). Dual-process morality and the personal/impersonal distinction: A reply to McGuire, Langdon, Coltheart, and Mackenzie. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.01.003
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Stanovich, K. E.. (2012). Distinguishing the reflective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds: Is it time for a tri-process theory?. In In Two Minds: Dual Processes and Beyond

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230167.003.0003
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Pelaccia, T., Tardif, J., Triby, E., & Charlin, B.. (2011). An analysis of clinical reasoning through a recent and comprehensive approach: The dual-process theory. Medical Education Online

Plain numerical DOI: 10.3402/meo.v16i0.5890
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T.. (1999). The Elaboration Likelihood Model: Current status and controversies. Dual Process Theories in Social Psychology

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/S0022-4405(97)00003-4
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Barrouillet, P.. (2011). Dual-process theories and cognitive development: Advances and challenges. Developmental Review

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/j.dr.2011.07.002
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Greene, J. D., Morelli, S. A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D.. (2008). Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment. Cognition

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.004
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Slade, P. D., & Glynn Owens, R.. (1998). A dual process model of perfectionism based on reinforcement theory. Behavior Modification

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1177/01454455980223010
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Sowden, P. T., Pringle, A., & Gabora, L.. (2015). The shifting sands of creative thinking: Connections to dual-process theory. Thinking and Reasoning

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1080/13546783.2014.885464
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J.. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_01
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., & Greenberg, J.. (1999). A dual-process model of defense against conscious and unconscious death-related thoughts: An extension of terror management theory. Psychological Review

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.835
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Knowles, E. S., & Condon, C. A.. (1999). Why people say “yes”: A dual-process theory of acquiescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.379
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Gawronski, B.. (2013). What should we expect from a dual-process theory of preference construction in choice?. Journal of Consumer Psychology

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.04.007
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Sahlin, N. E., Wallin, A., & Persson, J.. (2009). Decision science: From Ramsey to dual process theories. Synthese

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1007/s11229-009-9472-5
DOI URL
directSciHub download

De Neys, W.. (2017). Dual process theory 2.0. Dual Process Theory 2.0

Plain numerical DOI: 10.4324/9781315204550
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Reyna, V. F.. (2004). How People Make Decisions That Involve Risk: A Dual-Processes Approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00275.x
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Bago, B., & De Neys, W.. (2017). Fast logic?: Examining the time course assumption of dual process theory. Cognition

Plain numerical DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.014
DOI URL
directSciHub download

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

− 3 = 2