Dunning–Kruger effects in reasoning: Theoretical implications of the failure to recognize incompetence

A short form for assessing individual differences in need for cognition is described.

A new version of the Rational-Experiential Inventory (REI), which measures rational and experiential thinking styles and includes subscales of self-reported ability and engagement, was examined in two studies. In Study 1, the two main scales were independent, and they and their subscales exhibited discriminant validity and contributed to the prediction of a variety of measures beyond the contribution of the Big Five scales. A rational thinking style was most strongly and directly related to Ego Strength, Openness, Conscientiousness, and favorable basic beliefs about the self and the world, and it was most strongly inversely related to Neuroticism and Conservatism. An experiential thinking style was most strongly directly related to Extraversion, Agreeableness, Favorable Relationships Beliefs, and Emotional Expressivity, and it was most strongly inversely related to Categorical Thinking, Distrust of Others, and Intolerance. In Study 2, a rational thinking style was inversely related and an experiential thinking style was unrelated to nonoptimal responses in a game of chance. It was concluded that the new REI is a significant improvement over the previous version and measures unique aspects of personality.

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.