10/10

Huge thanks to my great co-authors @zoepurcell.bsky.social , @luciecharlesneuro.bsky.social and @wimdeneys.bsky.social, and to my lab @lapsyde.bsky.social.

Stay tuned for the computational modeling part! 🤓

You can access the preprint here: osf.io/preprints/ps...

They should do something about the acronym though ;-)

Goal: hopefully support more precise theorizing and empirical work on “System 2”—both in human and machine cognition. Full paper: osf.io/preprints/ps... (5/5)

I propose guiding principles to avoid problematic misconceptions and point to critical outstanding issues we need to address in the coming years. (4/5)

Key point is that deliberation should be understood as multifunctional, serving multiple, complementary purposes. (3/5)

Although deliberation is central to dual-process theories, its conceptualization remains vague. I sketch a framework clarifying what System 2 deliberation is and does. (2/5)

It's been contested from the start :-) but good point: "examined" would be more accurate

(6/6)
This preference can also be misused.
If people trust deliberation intuitively, it means both humans & AI can appear more trustworthy simply by framing decisions as “carefully reasoned”—even if they aren’t.

Read the full study: doi.org/10.31234/osf...

(5/6)
Why might this matter (even for "fast-and-slow" haters 😉)?
1️⃣ Deliberation shapes trust in advice
2️⃣ AI models already simulate deliberation (e.g., chain-of-thought reasoning).
3️⃣ Knowing this, AI developers can boost trust & fight algorithm aversion.
But…

(4/6)
Even under time pressure or cognitive load, participants still rated deliberation as better—ironically, indicating that the deliberation preference is itself intuitive.

Interestingly, ChatGPT (3.5 & 4) showed the same preference, suggesting AI models encode human folk beliefs about reasoning

(3/6)

We asked participants to rate individuals who reasoned intuitively vs. deliberatively—while controlling whether the individual was portrayed as accurate or not.
Across all conditions, we find a strong preference for deliberation.

(2/6)
While dual process research has pinpointed the mechanics of intuitive and deliberate thinking, we still lack understanding of how people perceive and value these modes of thought—what might be termed a “folk theory” of fast-and-slow thinking.