The basis of decision-making can be understood by studying the cognitive heuristics that accompany mental processing, thought, and ability to assess a situation. However, how can we examine the effects of decision-making when we skip the analyzing process – rather, how can we judge the effectiveness of following our gut in quick decisions? “Heuristics is the unconscious, or quick decisions that humans make due to integrated social norms, or mental short-cuts” (Pearl, Judea, 1983, p. 48). The use of heuristics in decision-making is often regarded as the foolish or quick decisions caused by the lack of full analysis before action. While there is an undeniable need for mental processing in any decision, psychologists question the accuracy of our
…show more content…
Gore and Sadler-Smith (2011) proceed to show the effects of dual-processing on intuition, and offer the theory that intuitive thinking is a much more conceptual and expansive process. The primary basis of this research was to show that while intuition plays a role in decision-making, it does not act alone. The findings show that the nature of intuition is strongly guided by individual façades of moral judgment (ingenuously, how we unconsciously act in order to produce embedded moral standards). Research argues that intuitive thinking relies heavily on emotional processing, as well as the biological anatomy of moral judgment (Gore & Sadler-Smith, 2011). The idea that self-efficacy and the belief in one’s own actions effects the ability and accuracy of individual intuitions – people with low-levels of self-efficacy are less likely to produce large amounts of intuitive thinking, and will more often choose careful analysis (Gore & Sadler-Smith, 2011). Also, the influence of empathy illustrates a large effect on the basis and level of intuitive decision-making. When humans perceive situations with the “that could be me” type processing, they are more likely to make an intuitive decision, this is due to the fact that many of our quick implicit decisions are made due to defense mechanisms (Gore & Sadler-Smith, 2001). In these …show more content…
The research regarding intuitive thinking is often compelling, but does not wholly rely on the quick, effortless decision that it is often regarded as. Intuition is hard to decipher alone, as it’s principle is not a simple construct, but a largely conceptual paradigm that relies heavily on culture, as well as individual empathy, and perceived levels of self-efficacy. Even with high levels of intuitive accuracy, the idea of experience and expertise comes into plan. How much of our intuitions are guided by previously encountered scenarios, visuals, and themes? While there will always be cases where large levels of intuitive accuracy is present, it is important to remember the conceptual and vast variables that effect perceived intuitions. Bluntly, intuition is “difficult to describe but easy to recognize” (Sadler-Smith, 2004, p. 78). Furthermore, the cases where intuitive thinking was most compelling were those when prior experience or expertise was present, making intuitive processes a result of automatic and analytic processing rather than
Gore and Sadler-Smith (2011) proceed to show the effects of dual-processing on intuition, and offer the theory that intuitive thinking is a much more conceptual and expansive process. The primary basis of this research was to show that while intuition plays a role in decision-making, it does not act alone. The findings show that the nature of intuition is strongly guided by individual façades of moral judgment (ingenuously, how we unconsciously act in order to produce embedded moral standards). Research argues that intuitive thinking relies heavily on emotional processing, as well as the biological anatomy of moral judgment (Gore & Sadler-Smith, 2011). The idea that self-efficacy and the belief in one’s own actions effects the ability and accuracy of individual intuitions – people with low-levels of self-efficacy are less likely to produce large amounts of intuitive thinking, and will more often choose careful analysis (Gore & Sadler-Smith, 2011). Also, the influence of empathy illustrates a large effect on the basis and level of intuitive decision-making. When humans perceive situations with the “that could be me” type processing, they are more likely to make an intuitive decision, this is due to the fact that many of our quick implicit decisions are made due to defense mechanisms (Gore & Sadler-Smith, 2001). In these …show more content…
The research regarding intuitive thinking is often compelling, but does not wholly rely on the quick, effortless decision that it is often regarded as. Intuition is hard to decipher alone, as it’s principle is not a simple construct, but a largely conceptual paradigm that relies heavily on culture, as well as individual empathy, and perceived levels of self-efficacy. Even with high levels of intuitive accuracy, the idea of experience and expertise comes into plan. How much of our intuitions are guided by previously encountered scenarios, visuals, and themes? While there will always be cases where large levels of intuitive accuracy is present, it is important to remember the conceptual and vast variables that effect perceived intuitions. Bluntly, intuition is “difficult to describe but easy to recognize” (Sadler-Smith, 2004, p. 78). Furthermore, the cases where intuitive thinking was most compelling were those when prior experience or expertise was present, making intuitive processes a result of automatic and analytic processing rather than