The cognitive reflection test is robust to multiple exposures
The cognitive reflection test is robust to multiple exposures
复制标题
DOI：
10.3758/s13428-017-0963-x
复制
发表时间：
2018-10-01
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Pennycook, Gordon
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bialek, Michal;Pennycook, Gordon
认知反射测试（CRT）是一种广泛使用的测量方法，用于分析或深思熟虑推理的倾向，而不是直觉或直觉。CRT问题是独特的，因为它们可靠地提示直觉但不正确的反应，因此在那些做得不好的人看来很简单。由于CRT是由所谓的难题组成的，理论上，这些难题是可以被发现的，所以人们普遍认为，CRT的预测有效性会被先前的任务经验所削弱。事实上，最近的研究表明，有过CRT测试经历的人在测试中得分更高。当然，这并不明显会破坏测试的预测有效性。在涉及2500名参与者和17个感兴趣变量（例如，宗教信仰、废话接受度、智能手机使用、对启发和偏见的敏感性以及计算能力）的6项研究中，我们没有发现一个案例表明，CRT的预测能力因反复接触而受到显著损害。尽管我们重复了之前报道的在有CRT经验的个体中准确性增加的事实，但这种情况还是发生了。我们推测，CRT在多次接触后仍然保持强劲，因为较少反思（更直观）的人没有意识到，多次呈现明显容易的问题会提供有关任务实际难度的信息。
The cognitive reflection test (CRT) is a widely used measure of the propensity to engage in analytic or deliberative reasoning in lieu of gut feelings or intuitions. CRT problems are unique because they reliably cue intuitive but incorrect responses and, therefore, appear simple among those who do poorly. By virtue of being composed of so-called trick problems that, in theory, could be discovered as such, it is commonly held that the predictive validity of the CRT is undermined by prior experience with the task. Indeed, recent studies have shown that people who have had previous experience with the CRT score higher on the test. Naturally, however, it is not obvious that this actually undermines the predictive validity of the test. Across six studies with similar to 2,500 participants and 17 variables of interest (e.g., religious belief, bullshit receptivity, smartphone usage, susceptibility to heuristics and biases, and numeracy), we did not find a single case in which the predictive power of the CRT was significantly undermined by repeated exposure. This occurred despite the fact that we replicated the previously reported increase in accuracy among individuals who reported previous experience with the CRT. We speculate that the CRT remains robust after multiple exposures because less reflective (more intuitive) individuals fail to realize that being presented with apparently easy problems more than once confers information about the task's actual difficulty.