11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Has the Standard Cognitive Reflection Test Become a Victim of Its Own Success?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) is a hugely influential problem solving task that measures individual differences in the propensity to reflect on and override intuitive (but incorrect) solutions. The validity of this three-item measure depends on participants being naïve to its materials and objectives. Evidence from 142 volunteers recruited online suggests this is often not the case. Over half of the sample had previously seen at least one of the problems, predominantly through research participation or the media. These participants produced substantially higher CRT scores than those without prior exposure (2.36 vs. 1.48), with the majority scoring at ceiling level. Participants that had previously seen a specific problem (e.g., the bat and ball problem) nearly always solved that problem correctly. These data suggest the CRT may have been widely invalidated. As a minimum, researchers must control for prior exposure to the three problems and begin to consider alternative, extended measures of cognitive reflection.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks.

          The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT; Frederick, 2005) is designed to measure the tendency to override a prepotent response alternative that is incorrect and to engage in further reflection that leads to the correct response. In this study, we showed that the CRT is a more potent predictor of performance on a wide sample of tasks from the heuristics-and-biases literature than measures of cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, and executive functioning. Although the CRT has a substantial correlation with cognitive ability, a series of regression analyses indicated that the CRT was a unique predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks. It accounted for substantial additional variance after the other measures of individual differences had been statistically controlled. We conjecture that this is because neither intelligence tests nor measures of executive functioning assess the tendency toward miserly processing in the way that the CRT does. We argue that the CRT is a particularly potent measure of the tendency toward miserly processing because it is a performance measure rather than a self-report measure.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Thinking Fast and Slow

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              The average laboratory samples a population of 7,300 Amazon Mechanical Turk workers

              Using capture-recapture analysis we estimate the effective size of the active Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) population that a typical laboratory can access to be about 7,300 workers. We also estimate that the time taken for half of the workers to leave the MTurk pool and be replaced is about 7 months. Each laboratory has its own population pool which overlaps, often extensively, with the hundreds of other laboratories using MTurk. Our estimate is based on a sample of 114,460 completed sessions from 33,408 unique participants and 689 sessions across seven laboratories in the US, Europe, and Australia from January 2012 to March 2015.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Adv Cogn Psychol
                Adv Cogn Psychol
                acp
                Advances in Cognitive Psychology
                University of Finance and Management in Warsaw
                1895-1171
                30 September 2016
                2016
                : 12
                : 3
                : 145-149
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Psychology, Northumbria University, UK
                Author notes
                Matthew Haigh, Department of Psychology, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NENE1 8STST, United Kingdom. Telephone: +44 (0)191 227 3472. E-mail: matthew.haigh@ 123456northumbria.ac.uk
                Article
                10.5709/acp-0193-5
                5225989
                c93f06ee-6147-4b26-9cf7-66df2222c2fa
                Copyright: © 2016 University of Finance and Management in Warsaw

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 1 July 2016
                : 20 September 2016
                Categories
                Research Article

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                cognitive reflection test,,crt,bat and ball problem,validity,test security

                Comments

                Comment on this article