Please wait a minute...
Acta Psychologica Sinica    2018, Vol. 50 Issue (6) : 583-591     DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.00583
Reports of Empirical Studies |
Positive effect of intuitive processing is modulated by cognitive resources under different levels of consciousness
Tingting YU1,Yue YIN1,Shu WANG1,Shujin ZHOU1,Xiaochen TANG2,Junlong LUO1()
1 Department of Psychology, College of Education, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China
2 Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200030, China
Download: PDF(429 KB)   HTML Review File (1 KB) 
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks     Supporting Info

It was argued that thinking is characterized by the action of two distinctive cognitive systems, namely, intuitive (Type 1) processing and analytic (Type 2) processing. Intuitive processing is generally described as rapid, automatic, unconscious, and effortless, whereas analytic processing appears to be slow, controlled, conscious, and effortful. Decades of research have established that human judgment is often predisposed to rapid, intuitive processing. However, recent research has indicated that intuitive processing can support reasoning and even enhance it under certain conditions. Recent findings have suggested that intuitive processing should be as affected by cognitive resources and consciousness as analytic processing. However, intuitive and analytic processing will interfere with one another through a series of classical paradigms in which the results of two distinctive cognitive systems are in conflict. To avoid this interference, the present study applied the Chinese character chunking decomposition task, predicting that intuitive processing positively affect problem solving, but that it would disappear under conditions wherein cognitive resources were extremely scarce.

In the present research, we first drew up the Chinese character chunking decomposition task as materials, and participants were asked to judge whether the target character (e.g., “又”) was a component of the original character (e.g., “支”). Then, the formal experiment was organized into a 2 × 2 × 2 within-subject design. The first variable was the duration time of the target character, consisting of 2 levels: 24 ms and 200 ms; the second variable was the material category, consisting of 2 levels: intuitive material and analytic material; and the third variable was the inclusion relation, consisting of 2 levels: inclusion and exclusion. The inclusion condition meant that the target character was a component of the original character, whereas the exclusion condition denoted that the target character was not a component of the original character.

The results indicated that participants showed a lower rate of accuracy and a longer response time on analytic materials than on intuitive ones. However, no difference was observed between the two types of materials in terms of response time and accuracy when the duration time of the target character was 24 ms, and the inclusion relation was inclusion. Meanwhile, the accuracy scores of intuitive and analytic processing were approximately 0.5 at the guessing level. Signal detection analysis showed that the results under the unconsciousness condition were not influenced by the response bias.

The results proved that intuitive processing was rapid and analytic processing was slow. As predicted, intuitive processing positively affects the problem solving process. In addition, the experiment showed that intuitive processing was effortful and relied on cognitive resources, which was inconsistent with prototypical dual-process theories. Therefore, the positive effect would disappear when the cognitive resources were below demand.

Keywords level of consciousness      cognitive resource      intuitive processing      analytic processing.     
ZTFLH:  B842  
Corresponding Authors: Junlong LUO     E-mail:
Issue Date: 28 April 2018
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
Tingting YU
Shujin ZHOU
Xiaochen TANG
Junlong LUO
Cite this article:   
Tingting YU,Yue YIN,Shu WANG, et al. Positive effect of intuitive processing is modulated by cognitive resources under different levels of consciousness[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2018, 50(6): 583-591.
URL:     OR
实验条件 正确率 反应时
包含下的直觉 0.99 (0.01) 796.94 (68.85)
包含下的分析 0.85 (0.07) 1204.83 (129.17)
不包含下的直觉 0.98 (0.02) 876.97 (62.82)
不包含下的分析 0.81 (0.08) 1224.08 (124.71)
条件 分析材料 直觉材料
24 ms 0.32 (0.60) 0.78 (0.78)
200 ms 2.62 (0.85) 3.97 (0.69)
[1] Bago, B., Li Qiao, De Neys , W. ( 2017). Fast logic?: Examining the time course assumption of dual process theory. Cognition, 158, 90-109.
pmid: 27816844 url:
[2] Bonner C., & Newell B. R . ( 2010). In conflict with ourselves? An investigation of heuristic and analytic processes in decision making. Memory & Cognition, 38, 186-196.
pmid: 20173191 url:
[3] De Neys , W. ( 2012). Bias and conflict: A case for logical intuitions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(1), 28-38.
[4] De Neys , W. ( 2014). Conflict detection, dual processes, and logical intuitions: Some clarifications. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 169-187.
[5] De Neys W., & Bonnefon J. F . ( 2013). The ‘whys’ and ‘whens’ of individual differences in thinking biases. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 172-178.
pmid: 23490722 url:
[6] De Neys W., & Feremans V . ( 2013). Development of heuristic bias detection in elementary school. Developmental Psychology, 49(2), 258-269.
pmid: 22545836 url:
[7] De Neys W., & Franssens S . ( 2009). Belief inhibition during thinking: Not always winning but at least taking part. Cognition, 113, 45-61.
pmid: 19703685 url:
[8] De Neys W., Moyens E., & Vansteenwegen D . ( 2010). Feeling we’re biased: Autonomic arousal and reasoning conflict. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 10, 208-216.
pmid: 20498345 url:
[9] De Neys W., Rossi S., & Houdé O . ( 2013). Bats, balls, and substitution sensitivity: Cognitive misers are no happy fools. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 269-273.
pmid: 23417270 url:
[10] Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.
pmid: 18154502 url:
[11] Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 2012). Spot the difference: Distinguishing between two kinds of processing. Mind & Society, 11, 121-131.
[12] Evans J. St. B. T., & Curtis-Holmes J . ( 2005). Rapid responding increases belief bias: Evidence for the dual-process theory of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 11(4), 382-389.
[13] Evans J. St. B. T., Handley S. J., & Bacon A. M . ( 2009). Reasoning under time pressure: A study of causal conditional inference. Experimental Psychology, 56, 77-83.
pmid: 19261582 url:
[14] Evans J. St. B. T., & Stanovich K. E . ( 2013). Dual process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 223-241.
[15] Gobet F., Lane P. C. R., Croker S., Cheng P. C.-H., Jones G., Oliver I., & Pine J. M . ( 2001). Chunking mechanisms in human learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(6), 236-243.
pmid: 11390294 url:
[16] Gobet F., Lloyd-Kelly M., & Lane P. C. R . ( 2016). What's in a name? The multiple meanings of "chunk" and "chunking". Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 102.
pmid: 26903910 url:
[17] Handley S. J., Newstead S. E., & Trippas D . ( 2011). Logic, beliefs, and instruction: A test of the default interventionist account of belief bias. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory,and Cognition, 37, 28-43.
pmid: 21058879 url:
[18] Handley S. J., & Trippas D . ( 2015). Dual processes and the interplay between knowledge and structure: A new parallel processing model. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 62, 33-58.
[19] Howarth S., Handley S. J., & Walsh C . ( 2016). The logic-bias effect: The role of effortful processing in the resolution of belief-logic conflict. Memory & Cognition, 44, 330-349.
pmid: 26390872 url:
[20] Johnson E. D., Tubau E., & De Neys W . ( 2016). The doubting system 1: Evidence for automatic substitution sensitivity. Acta Psychologica, 164, 56-64.
pmid: 26722837 url:
[21] Kruglanski A. W., & Gigerenzer G . ( 2011). Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles. Psychological Review, 118(1), 97-109.
pmid: 21244188 url:
[22] Luo J., Niki K., & Knoblich G . ( 2006). Perceptual contributions to problem solving: Chunk decomposition of Chinese characters. Brain Research Bulletin, 70, 430-443.
pmid: 17027779 url:
[23] Mevel K., Poirel N., Rossi S., Cassotti M., Simon G., Houdé O., & De Neys W . ( 2015). Bias detection: Response confidence evidence for conflict sensitivity in the ratio bias task. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27, 227-237.
[24] Pennycook G., Cheyne, J. A. Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang J. A . ( 2013). Belief bias during reasoning among religious believers and skeptics. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 20, 806-811.
pmid: 23397237 url:
[25] Pennycook G., Fugelsang J. A., & Koehler D. J . ( 2015). What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cognitive Psychology, 80, 34-72.
pmid: 26091582 url:
[26] Pennycook G., Trippas D ., Handley, S. J. & Thompson, V. A. ( 2014). Base rates: Both neglected and intuitive. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(2), 544-554.
[27] Shen M. W., Gao T., & Ding H. J . ( 2004). A study of Chinese and Arabic numerals' subliminal priming effects. Psychological Science, 27(1), 13-17.
[27] [ 沈模卫, 高涛, 丁海杰 . ( 2004). 汉字数字与阿拉伯数字的阈下启动研究. 心理科学, 27(1), 13-17.]
[28] Shui R. D., Ding H. J., & Shen M. W . ( 2003). Unconscious mechanisms of Chinese characters in subliminal semantic activation. Psychological Science, 26(6), 1025-1029.
[28] [ 水仁德, 丁海杰, 沈模卫 . ( 2003). 汉语阈下语义启动无意识机制研究. 心理科学, 26(6), 1025-1029.]
[29] Shui R. D., & Liu A. L . ( 1996). Coding effects on retrieving Chinese characters from short-term memory. Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology, 2(1), 59-63.
[29] [ 水仁德, 刘爱伦 . ( 1996). 编码方式对汉字短时记忆提取的影响. 应用心理学, 2(1), 59-63.]
[30] Tang X. C., Pang J. Y., Nie Q.-Y., Conci M., Luo J. L., & Luo J . ( 2016). Probing the cognitive mechanism of mental representational change during chunk decomposition: A parametric fMRI study. Cerebral Cortex, 26(7), 2991-2999.
pmid: 26045566 url:
[31] Thompson, V. A . ( 2013). Why it matters: The implications of autonomous processes for dual-process theories: Commentary on Evans & Stanovich (2013). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 253-256.
pmid: 26172968 url:
[32] Thompson V. A., Evans J. St. B. T., & Campbell J. I. D . ( 2013). Matching bias on the selection task: It’s fast and feels good. Thinking & Reasoning, 19, 431-452.
[33] Thompson V. A., Prowse Turner J. A., & Pennycook G . ( 2011). Intuition, reason, and metacognition. Cognitive Psychology, 63, 107-140.
pmid: 21798215 url:
[34] Thompson V. A., Prowse Turner J., Pennycook G., Ball L. J., Brack H., Ophir Y., & Ackerman R . ( 2013). The role of answer fluency and perceptual fluency as metacognitive cues for initiating analytic thinking. Cognition, 128, 237-251.
[35] Trippas D., Thompson V. A., & Handley S. J . ( 2017). When fast logic meets slow belief: Evidence for a parallel-processing model of belief bias. Memory & Cognition, 45, 539-552.
pmid: 5432582 url:
[36] Trippas D., Verde M. F., & Handley S. J . ( 2014). Using forced choice to test belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. Cognition, 133(3), 586-600.
pmid: 25218460 url:
[1] ZHANG Bao, HU Cenlou, CHEN Yanzhang, MIAO Sumei, HUANG Sai.  The modulation of working memory load and perceptual load on attentional guidance from representations of working memory[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(8): 1009-1021.
Full text



Copyright © Acta Psychologica Sinica
Support by Beijing Magtech