Share This Article:

Atheists Score Higher on Cognitive Reflection Tests

DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1102235    619 Downloads   942 Views   Citations

ABSTRACT

We administrate the cognitive reflection test devised by Frederick to a sample of 483 undergraduates and discriminate the sample to consider selected demographic characteristics. For the sake of robustness, we take two extra versions that present cues for removing the automatic (but wrong) answers suggested by the test. We find a participant’s gender and religious attitude to matter for the test performance on the three versions. Males score significantly higher than females, and so do atheists of either gender. While the former result replicates a previous finding that is now reasonably well established, the latter is new. The fact that atheists score higher agrees with the literature showing that belief is an automatic manifestation of the mind and its default mode. Disbelieving seems to require deliberative cognitive ability. Such results are verified by an extra sample of 81 participants using Google Docs questionnaires via the Internet.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Silva, S. , Matsushita, R. , Seifert, G. and Carvalho, M. (2015) Atheists Score Higher on Cognitive Reflection Tests. Open Access Library Journal, 2, 1-8. doi: 10.4236/oalib.1102235.

References

[1] Evans, J.S.B.T. (2003) In Two Minds: Dual-Process Accounts of Reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 454-459.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.08.012
[2] Evans, J.S.B.T. (2008) Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
[3] Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
[4] Stanovich, K.E. and West, R.F. (2000) Individual Differences in Reasoning: Implications for the Rationality Debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645-665.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00003435
[5] Stanovich, K.E. (2004) The Robot’s Rebellion: Finding Meaning in the Age of Darwin. Chicago University Press, Chicago.
http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226771199.001.0001
[6] Trivers, R. (2011) The Folly of Fools: The Logic of Deceit and Self-Deception in Human Life. Basic Books, New York.
[7] Wason, P. (1966) Reasoning. In: Foss, B.M., Ed., New Horizons in Psychology, Vol. 1, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 135-151.
[8] Cosmides, L. and Tooby, J. (1992) Cognitive Adaptations for Social Exchange. In: Barkow, J.H., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., Eds., The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 163-228.
[9] Goel, V. and Dolan, R.J. (2003) Explaining Modulation of Reasoning by Belief. Cognition, 87, B11-B22.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00185-3
[10] Houde, O., Zago, L., Crivello, F., Moutier, S., Pineau, A., Mazoyer, B. and Tzourio-Mazoyer, N. (2001) Access to Deductive Logic Depends upon a Right Ventromedial Prefrontal Area Devoted to Emotion and Feeling: Evidence from a Training Paradigm. Neuroimage, 14, 1486-1492.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.0930
[11] Houde, O., Zago, L., Mellet, E., Moutier, S., Pineau, A., Mazoyer, B. and Tzourio-Mazoyer, N. (2000) Shifting from the Perceptual Brain to the Logical Brain: The Neural Impact of Cognitive Inhibition Training. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 721-728.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/089892900562525
[12] Goel, V., Buchel, C., Frith, C. and Dolan, R.J. (2000) Dissociation of Mechanisms Underlying Syllogistic Reasoning. Neuroimage, 12, 504-514.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2000.0636
[13] Mithen, S. (2002) Human Evolution and the Cognitive Basis of Science. In: Carruthers, P., Stich, S. and Siegel, M., The Cognitive Basis of Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 23-40.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613517.003
[14] Frederick, S. (2005) Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 25-42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732
[15] Toplak, M.E., West, R.F. and Stanovich, K.E. (2011) The Cognitive Reflection Test as a Predictor of Performance on Heuristics-and-Biases Tasks. Memory & Cognition, 39, 1275-1289.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0104-1
[16] Heider, F. and Simmel, M. (1944) An Experimental Study of Apparent Behavior. The American Journal of Psychology, 57, 243-259.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1416950
[17] Leslie, A.M. and Keeble, S. (1987) Do Six-Month-Old Infants Perceive Causality? Cognition, 25, 265-288.
[18] Bloom, P. (2005) Is God an Accident? The Atlantic, 12, 105-112.
[19] Da Silva, S., Baldo, D. and Matsushita, R. (2013) Biological Correlates of the Allais Paradox. Applied Economics, 45, 555-568.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2011.607133
[20] Kirkpatrick, L.A. and Epstein, S. (1992) Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory and Subjective Probability: Further Evidence for Two Conceptual Systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 534-544.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.534
[21] Gilbert, D.T. (1991) How Mental Systems Believe. American Psychologist, 46, 107-119.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.46.2.107

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2019 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.