Does cognitive reflection predict attentional control in visual tasks?

Dual-Process Theory of Thought and Inhibitory Control: An ALE Meta-Analysis

The dual-process theory of thought rests on the co-existence of two different thinking modalities: a quick, automatic, and associative process opposed to a slow, thoughtful, and deliberative process. The increasing interest in determining the neural foundation of the dual-process distinction has yielded mixed results, also given the difficulty of applying the fMRI standard approach to tasks usually employed in the cognitive literature. We report an activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analysis to investigate the neural foundation of the dual-process theory of thought. Eligible studies allowed for the identification of cerebral areas associated with dual-process theory-based tasks without differentiating between fast and slow thinking. The ALE algorithm converged on the medial frontal cortex, superior frontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, insula, and left inferior frontal gyrus. These structures partially overlap with the cerebral areas recurrently reported in the literature about the neural basis of the dual-process distinction, where the PARCS theory-based interpretation emphasizes the role of the right inferior gyrus. The results confirm the potential (but still almost unexplored) common ground between the dual-process literature and the cognitive control literature.

Intuitive thinking predicts false memory formation due to a decrease in inhibitory efficiency

False memory formation is usually studied using the Deese-Roediger-McDermott paradigm (DRM), in which individuals incorrectly remember words that were not originally presented. In this paper, we systematically investigated how two modes of thinking (analytical vs. intuitive) can influence the tendency to create false memories. The increased propensity of intuitive thinkers to generate more false memories can be explained by one or both of the following hypotheses: a decrease in the inhibition of the lure words that come to mind, or an increased reliance on the familiarity heuristic to determine if the word has been previously studied. In two studies, we conducted tests of both recognition and recall using the DRM paradigm. Our observations indicate that a decrease in inhibitory efficiency plays a larger role in false memory formation compared to the use of the familiarity heuristic.