A perspective on the theoretical foundation of dual process models

Dual Process Theory 2.0

Volumn , Issue , 2017, Pages 5-27

  Pennycook, Gordon ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85042020173     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315204550     Document Type: Chapter

References (104)

1. Aczel, B., & Palfi , B. (2017). Studying the role of cognitive control in reasoning: Evidence for the congruency sequence effect in the ratio-bias task. Thinking & Reasoning . Retrieved from doi:10.1080/13546783.2016.1220424
2. Ashcraft, M., Donley, R., Halas, M., & Vakali, M. (1992). Working memory, automaticity, and problem diffi culty. Advances in Psychology . Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0166411508608900
3. Bago, B., & De Neys, W. (2017). Fast logic? Examining the time course assumption of dual process theory. Cognition , 158 , 90-109. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.014
4. Ball, L. J., Phillips, P., Wade, C. N., & Quayle, J. D. (2006). Effects of belief and logic on syllogistic reasoning: Eye-movement evidence for selective processing models. Experimental Psychology , 53 (1), 77-86. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.53.1.77
5. Banks, A. P., & Hope, C. (2014). Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning: An eventrelated potential study of belief bias. Psychophysiology , 51 (3), 290-297. doi:10.1111/ psyp.12169
6. Barbey, A. K., & Sloman, S. A. (2007). Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30 , 241-297.
7. Barr, N., Pennycook, G., Stolz, J. A., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015a). The brain in your pocket: Evidence that Smartphones are used to supplant thinking. Computers in Human Behavior , 48 , 473-480. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.029
8. Barr, N., Pennycook, G., Stolz, J. A., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015b). Reasoned connections: A dual-process perspective on creative thought. Thinking and Reasoning , 21 (1), 61-75. doi:10. 1080/13546783.2014.895915
9. Barrouillet, P. (2011). Dual-process theories and cognitive development: Advances and challenges. Developmental Review , 31 (2-3), 79-85. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2011.07.002
10. Bechara, A., Damasio, A., Damasio, H., & Anderson, S. (1994). Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition . Retrieved from www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010027794900183
11. Beevers, C. (2005). Cognitive vulnerability to depression: A dual process model. Clinical Psychology Review . Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0272735805000267
12. Berlyne, D. (1957). Uncertainty and confl ict: A point of contact between information-theory and behavior-theory concepts. Psychological Review . Retrieved from psycnet.apa.org/ psycinfo/1959-03696-001
13. Bonner, C., & Newell, B. R. (2010). In confl ict with ourselves? An investigation of heuristic and analytic processes in decision making. Memory & Cognition , 38 (2), 186-196. doi:10.3758/ MC.38.2.186
14. Botvinick, M. M., & Braver, T. (2015). Motivation and cognitive control: From behavior to neural mechanism. Annual Review of Psychology, 66 , 83-113. doi:10.1146/annurevpsych- 010814-015044
15. Botvinick, M. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2014). The computational and neural basis of cognitive control: Charted territory and new frontiers. Cognitive Science , 38 (6), 1249-1285. doi:10.1111/cogs.12126
16. Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J. D., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Confl ict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: An update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 8 (12), 539-546. doi:10.1016/j.tics. 2004.10.003
17. Brainerd, C., & Reyna, V. (2001). Fuzzy-trace theory: Dual processes in memory, reasoning, and cognitive neuroscience. Advances in child development . Retrieved from idml.medicine. arizona.edu/Articles/Fuzzy traceTheoryDualProcessesinMemoryReasoningandCo.pdf
18. Campitelli, G., & Gerrans, P. (2014). Does the cognitive refl ection test measure cognitive refl ection? A mathematical modeling approach. Memory & Cognition , 42 (3), 434-447. doi:10.3758/s13421-013-0367-9
19. Carter, C. S., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Botvinick, M. M., Noll, D., & Cohen, J. D. (1998). Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science , 280 (5364), 747-749. doi:10.1126/science.280.5364.747
20. Carter, C. S., & van Veen, V. (2007). Anterior cingulate cortex and confl ict detection: An update of theory and data. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience , 7 (4), 367-379. doi:10.3758/cabn.7.4.367
21. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology . Retrieved from books. google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=5X_auIBx99EC&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=chaiken+tro pe&ots=OIUS_R4dpi&sig=IiM_NXY00rARlPXlirUdjz8S_Gw
22. Cheyne, J. A., & Pennycook, G. (2013). Sleep paralysis postepisode distress: Modeling potential effects of episode characteristics, general psychological distress, beliefs, and cognitive style. Clinical Psychological Science , 1 (2), 135-148. doi:10.1177/2167702612466656
23. De Neys, W. (2012). Bias and confl ict: A case for logical intuitions. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 7 (1), 28-38. doi:10.1177/1745691611429354
24. De Neys, W. (2014). Confl ict detection, dual processes, and logical intuitions: Some clarifi cations. Thinking & Reasoning , 20 (2), 169-187. doi:10.1080/13546783.2013.854725
25. De Neys, W., & Bonnefon, J. F. (2013). The "whys" and "whens" of individual differences in thinking biases. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 17 (4), 172. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2013.02.001
26. De Neys, W., Cromheeke, S., & Osman, M. (2011). Biased but in doubt: Confl ict and decision confi dence. PLoS One , 6 (1), e15954. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015954
27. De Neys, W., & Franssens, S. (2009). Belief inhibition during thinking: Not always winning but at least taking part. Cognition , 113 (1), 45-61. doi:10.1016/j.cognition. 2009.07.009
28. De Neys, W., & Glumicic, T. (2008). Confl ict monitoring in dual process theories of thinking. Cognition , 106 (3), 1248-1299. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.06.002
29. De Neys, W., Moyens, E., & Vansteenwegen, D. (2010). Feeling we're biased: Autonomic arousal and reasoning confl ict. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience , 10 (2), 208-216. doi:10.3758/CABN.10.2.208
30. De Neys, W., Novitskiy, N., Ramautar, J., & Wagemans, J. (2010). What Makes a Good Reasoner? Brain Potentials and Heuristic Bias Susceptibility. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society , Portland, Oregon, 1020-1025.
31. De Neys, W., Rossi, S., & Houdé, O. (2013). Bats, balls, and substitution sensitivity: Cognitive misers are no happy fools. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 20 (2), 269-273. doi:10.3758/ s13423-013-0384-5
32. De Neys, W., Vartanian, O., & Goel, V. (2008). Smarter than we think. Psychological Science , 19 (5), 483-489.
33. Egner, T. (2007). Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience . Retrieved from link.springer.com/article/10.3758/ CABN.7.4.380
34. Epstein, S., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V., & Heier, H. (1996). Individual differences in intuitiveexperiential and analytical-rational thinking styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 71 (2), 390-405. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.390
35. Evans, J. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences . Retrieved from psycnet.apa. org/psycinfo/1989-98394-000
36. Evans, J. (2007). Hypothetical thinking: Dual processes in reasoning and judgement . Retrieved from books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=UcR4AgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq =evans+hypothetical+thinking&ots=eynH0n7mnu&sig=kMBJUMjOOiq22avtgZgdo1 BZ0HU
37. Evans, J. (2012). Dual process theories of deductive reasoning: Facts and fallacies. The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning . Retrieved from books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&i d=BNdBAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA115&dq=Dual-process+theories+of+reasoning: +facts+and+fallacies.&ots=-TgSCSLemE&sig=0mf7m-4YOxR1raJB1uzdTnqqI00
38. Evans, J., & Frankish, K. (2009). In two minds: Dual processes and beyond . Retrieved from psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2009-05881-000
39. Evans, J., Handley, S., Neilens, H., Bacon, A., & Over, D. (2010). The infl uence of cognitive ability and instructional set on causal conditional inference. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63 , 892-909. Retrieved from www.tandfonline.com/doi/ abs/10.1080/17470210903111821
40. Evans, J. St B. T. (2003). In two minds: Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 7 (10), 454-459. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.08.012
41. Evans, J. St B. T. (2006). The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 13 (3), 378-395. doi:10.3758/BF03193858
42. Evans, J. St B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology , 59 , 255-278. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych. 59.103006.093629
43. Evans, J. St B. T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013a). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 8 (3), 223-241. doi:10.1177/ 1745691612460685
44. Evans, J. St B. T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013b). Theory and metatheory in the study of dual processing: Reply to comments. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 8 (3), 263-271. doi:10.1177/1745691613483774
45. Frankish, K., & Evans, J. (2009). The duality of mind: An historical perspective. In In two minds: Dual processes and beyond . Retrieved from citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download ?doi=10.1.1.521.2151&rep=rep1&type=pdf
46. Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive refl ection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives , 19 (4), 25-42. doi:10.1257/089533005775196732
47. Goel, V. (2007). Anatomy of deductive reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 11 (10), 435-441. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.09.003
48. Goel, V., Buchel, C., Frith, C., & Dolan, R. J. (2000). Dissociation of mechanisms underlying syllogistic reasoning. NeuroImage , 12 (5), 504-514. doi:10.1006/nimg.2000.0636
49. Goel, V., & Dolan, R. J. (2004). Differential involvement of left prefrontal cortexin inductive and deductive reasoning. Cognition , 93 (3), 109-121. doi:10.1016/j.cognition. 2004.03.001
50. Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science (New York, N.Y.) , 293 (5537), 2105-2108. doi:10.1126/science.1062872
51. 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, & Cognition , 37 (1), 28-43. doi:10.1037/a0021098
52. 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 - Advances in Research and Theory , 62 , 33-58. doi:10.1016/bs.plm.2014.09.002
53. Johnson, E. D., Tubau, E., & De Neys, W. (2016). The doubting system 1: Evidence for automatic substitution sensitivity. Acta Psychologica , 164 , 56-64. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy. 2015.12.008
54. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow . New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
55. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2005). A model of heuristic judgment. In K Holyoak, R. G, Morrison, (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 267-294). doi:10.1111/ cogs.12119
56. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review . Retrieved from psycnet.apa.org/journals/rev/80/4/237/
57. Klaczynski, P. (2001). Analytic and heuristic processing infl uences on adolescent reasoning and decision-making. Child Development . doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00319/full
58. Kokis, J. V., Macpherson, R., Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2002). Heuristic and analytic processing: Age trends and associations with cognitive ability and cognitive styles. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology , 83 (1), 26-52. doi:10.1016/ S0022-0965(02)00121-2
59. Lieberman, M. (2007). Social cognitive neuroscience: A review of core processes. Annual Review of Psychology . doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085654
60. MacLeod, C. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin . Retrieved from psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/109/2/163/
61. Mars, R., Sallet, J., Rushworth, M., & Yeung, N. (Eds.). (2011). Neural basis of motivational and cognitive control . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from books.google.ca/ books?hl=en&lr=&id=A_eoYgtLmFMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=Neural+Basis+of+M otivational+and+Cognitive+Control&ots=YdrMFRZmMV&sig=y79S3I4he46p1_11Ds lsY-BLp_s
62. Mevel, K., Poirel, N., Rossi, S., Cassotti, M., Simon, G., Houdé, O., & De Neys, W. (2015). Bias detection: Response confi dence evidence for confl ict sensitivity in the ratio bias task. Journal of Cognitive Psychology , 27 (2), 227-237. doi:10.1080/20445911.2014.986 487
63. Morsanyi, K., & Handley, S. J. (2012). Logic feels so good - I like it! Evidence for intuitive detection of logicality in syllogistic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 38 (3), 596-616. doi:10.1037/a0026099
64. Padmala, S., & Pessoa, L. (2010). Interactions between cognition and motivation during response inhibition. Neuropsychologia . Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0028393209004205
65. Pennycook, G. (2014). Evidence that analytic cognitive style infl uences religious belief: Comment on Razmyar and Reeve (2013). Intelligence , 43 (1), 21-26. doi:10.1016/j.intell. 2013.12.005
66. Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2014a). Cognitive style and religiosity: The role of confl ict detection. Memory and Cognition , 42 (1), 1-10. doi:10.3758/s13421-013-0340-7
67. Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2014b). The role of analytic thinking in moral judgements and values. Thinking & Reasoning , 20 (2), 188-214. doi:10.1080/13546783.2013.865000
68. Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making , 10 (6), 549-563. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00279
69. Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2016). Is the cognitive refl ection test a measure of both refl ection and intuition? Behavior Research Methods , 48 (1), 341-348. doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0576-1
70. Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Seli, P., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2012). Analytic cognitive style predicts religious and paranormal belief. Cognition , 123 (3), 335-346. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.003
71. Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2012). Are we good at detecting confl ict during reasoning? Cognition , 124 (1), 101-106. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.04.004
72. Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2015a). Everyday consequences of analytic thinking. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 24 (6), 425-432. doi:10.1177/ 0963721415604610
73. Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2015b). What makes us think? A threestage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cognitive Psychology , 80 , 34-72. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.05.001
74. Pennycook, G., & Ross, R. M. (2016). Commentary on: Cognitive refl ection vs. calculation in decision making. Frontiers in Psychology , 7 , 9. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00532
75. Pennycook, G., Ross, R. M., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2016). Atheists and agnostics are more refl ective than religious believers: Four empirical studies and a meta-analysis. PLoS One , 11 (4), e0153039. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153039
76. Pennycook, G., & Thompson, V. A. (2012). Reasoning with base rates is routine, relatively effortless, and context dependent. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 19 (3), 528-534. doi:10.3758/s13423-012-0249-3
77. Pennycook, G., & Thompson, V. A. (2016). Base rate neglect. In R. F. Pohl (Ed.), Cognitive illusions (pp. 44-61). London: Routledge. Retrieved from books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr= &id=0Ge3DAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA44&dq=Base+rate+neglect+gordon+pennycoo k+valerie+thompson&ots=ibCDvspUlE&sig=2sk5KsbSWBXddL0-zTbQAdsHxns
78. 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. doi:10.1037/a0034887
79. Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & Solomon, S. (1999). A dual-process model of defense against conscious and unconscious death-related thoughts: An extension of terror management theory. Psychological Review . Retrieved from psycnet.apa.org/journals/rev/106/4/835/
80. Shenhav, A., Botvinick, M., & Cohen, J. (2013). The expected value of control: An integrative theory of anterior cingulate cortex function. Neuron , 79 (2), 217-240. doi:10.1016/j. neuron.2013.07.007
81. Simon, G., Lubin, A., Houdé, O., & De Neys, W. (2015). Anterior cingulate cortex and intuitive bias detection during number conservation. Cognitive Neuroscience , (July), 6, 158-168. doi:10.1080/17588928.2015.1036847
82. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin , 119 (1), 3-22. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.3
83. Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning . Retrieved from books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-C15AgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq =stanovich+1999&ots=Qw9eewWfVY&sig=q4fM4iDb1joycLUpAiKyzrQKc0o
84. Stanovich, K. E. (2005). The robot's rebellion: Finding meaning in the age of Darwin . Retrieved from books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=gib3SwqcH8AC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq= stanovich+robots+rebellion&ots=usG0dwta65&sig=D2sBjunrZeFstrynz60tWlHUN7U
85. Stanovich, K. E. (2009). Distinguishing the refl ective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds: Is it time for a tri-process theory. In In two minds: Dual processes and beyond . Retrieved from keithstanovich.com/Site/Research_on_Reasoning_fi les/Stanovich_Two_MInds.pdf
86. Stanovich, K. E. (2012). On the distinction between rationality and intelligence: Implications for understanding individual differences in reasoning. In In K. Holyoak & R. Morrison (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 433-455). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
87. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 127 (2), 161-188. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.127.2.161
88. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 23 (5), 645-665. doi:10.1017/ S0140525X00003435
89. Stollstorff, M., Vartanian, O., & Goel, V. (2012). Levels of confl ict in reasoning modulate right lateral prefrontal cortex. Brain Research , 1428 , 24-32. doi:10.1016/j.brainres. 2011.05.045
90. Stroop, J. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology . Retrieved from psycnet.apa.org/journals/xge/18/6/643/
91. Thompson, V. A. (2009). Dual process theories: A metacognitive perspective. In Two minds: Dual processes and beyond . Oxford. Retrieved from faculty.weber.edu/eamsel/ResearchGroups/ DualPRocessResearch/NewPapers/Thomson(2009).pdf
92. 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. doi:10.1177/1745691613483476
93. Thompson, V. A., Ackerman, R., Sidi, Y., Ball, L. J., Pennycook, G., & Prowse Turner, J. A. (2013). The role of answer fl uency and perceptual fl uency in the monitoring and control of reasoning: Reply to Alter, Oppenheimer, and Epley (2013). Cognition , 128 (2), 256-258. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.03.003
94. 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 (3-4), 431-452. doi:10.1080/1 3546783.2013.820220
95. Thompson, V. A., & Johnson, S. C. (2014). Confl ict, metacognition, and analytic thinking. Thinking & Reasoning , 20 (January 2015), 215-244. doi:10.1080/13546783.2013.869763
96. Thompson, V. A., & Morsanyi, K. (2012). Analytic thinking: Do you feel like it? Mind and Society , 11 (1), 93-105. doi:10.1007/s11299-012-0100-6
97. Thompson, V. A., Prowse Turner, J. A., & Pennycook, G. (2011). Intuition, reason, and metacognition. Cognitive Psychology , 63 (3), 107-140. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.06.001
98. Thompson, V. A., Turner, J. A. P., Pennycook, G., Ball, L. J., Brack, H., Ophir, Y., & Ackerman, R. (2013). The role of answer fl uency and perceptual fl uency as metacognitive cues for initiating analytic thinking. Cognition , 128 (2), 237-251. doi:10.1016/j.cognition. 2012.09.012
99. Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011). The cognitive refl ection test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks. Memory & Cognition , 39 (7), 1275-1289. doi:10.3758/s13421-011-0104-1
100. Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the cognitive refl ection test. Thinking & Reasoning , 20 (2), 147-168. doi:10.1080/ 13546783.2013.844729
101. Travers, E., Rolison, J. J., & Feeney, A. (2016). The time course of confl ict on the cognitive refl ection test. Cognition , 150 , 109-118. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2016.01.015
102. Trippas, D., Handley, S., Verde, M., & Morsanyi, K. (2016). Logic brightens my day: Evidence for implicit sensitivity to logical validity. Retrieved from psycnet.apa.org/ psycinfo/2016-08774-001/
103. Trippas, D., Thompson, V., & Handley, S. (2016). When fast logic meets slow belief: Evidence for a parallel-processing model of belief bias. Memory & Cognition . Retrieved from link. springer.com/article/10.3758/s13421-016-0680-1
104. Tronsky, L. (2005). Strategy use, the development of automaticity, and working memory involvement in complex multiplication. Memory & Cognition . Retrieved from link. springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03193086