Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Reposted by Wim De Neys

Communications Psychology @commspsychol.nature.com · 1d

People and LLMs evaluate deliberative reasoning more favorably than intuitive thinking—even when both yield accurate results. This preference appears to be intuitive itself and has implications for how we assess others’ and AI advise.
@wimdeneys.bsky.social
www.nature.com/articles/s44...

Humans and LLMs rate deliberation as superior to intuition on complex reasoning tasks - Communications Psychology

People and LLMs evaluate deliberative reasoning more favorably than intuitive thinking—even when both yield accurate results. This preference appears to be intuitive itself and has implications for how we assess others’ and AI advise.

www.nature.com

2 6

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · 8d

Paper is now published: www.nature.com/articles/s44...

3 8

Reposted by Wim De Neys

Jorge Peña @jorgeapenas.bsky.social · 16d

📢 Apply to our (2-year) research fellowships at @iast.fr

Join a multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, and indisciplinary group of scholars in Toulouse, walkable/cyclable pink city of chocolatines in the South of France.

Deadline: November 15, 2025.

www.iast.fr/research-fel...

Research Fellowships

Each year, IAST invites applications for post-doctoral Research Fellowships, which offer candidates an opportunity to devote themselves full-time to their research at the start of their careers. Fello...

www.iast.fr

2 26 32

Reposted by Wim De Neys

Jean-François Bonnefon @jfbonnefon.bsky.social · 18d

It's hiring season at @iast.fr!

- 2y research postdoc contract
- Full autonomy, you are your own PI
- Awesome multidisciplinary environment
- All social and behavioral sciences welcome
- Seed funding for projects and workshops
- Gorgeous city in the south of France

www.iast.fr/research-fel...

50 61

Reposted by Wim De Neys

Nicolas Beauvais @nicolasbeauvais.bsky.social · Aug 21

Happy to share that my first paper is out in Thinking & Reasoning! 📄📢
With Aikaterini Voudouri, @boissinesther.bsky.social & @wimdeneys.bsky.social we show that deliberate reasoning helps not just to correct but also to justify intuitive judgments.

🔗Full paper: shorturl.at/JTeTi
Quick thread below!

1 6 14

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · Aug 7

Moses, fast and slow ! @jeremiebeucler.bsky.social interesting evidence for sound intuiting (and reflection). My take home: Don't use semantic illusions as a pure test of cognitive reflection.

Jérémie Beucler @jeremiebeucler.bsky.social · Aug 6

1/8

New (and first) paper accepted at JEP:LMC 🎉

Ever fallen for this type of questions: "How many animals of each kind did Moses take on the Ark?" Most say "Two," forgetting it was Noah, and not Moses, who took the animals on the Ark. But what’s really going on here? 🧵

When asked “How many animals of each kind did Moses take on the Ark?”, most people answer “Two”, failing to notice that it was Noah, and not Moses, who took the animals in the Ark. “Fast-and-slow” dual process accounts of such semantic illusions posit that incorrect responders are not sensitive to their error and that overcoming the illusion requires deliberate correction of an intuitive erroneous answer. We present three experiments that force us to revise this dual process view. We used a two-response paradigm in which participants had to give their first, initial answer under cognitive load and time pressure. Next, participants could take all the time they wanted to deliberate and select a final answer. This enabled us to identify the intuitively generated response that preceded the final response given after deliberation. Results show that participants do not necessarily need to deliberate to avoid the illusion and that incorrect respondents consistently display error sensitivity (as reflected in decreased confidence), even when deliberation is minimized. Both reasoning performance and error sensitivity in the initial, intuitive stage tended to be driven by the semantic relatedness between the anomalous word (e.g., “Moses”) and the undistorted word (e.g., “Noah”). We show how this leads to a revised model where the response to semantic illusions depends on the interplay of both incorrect and correct intuitions.

3

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · Jul 12

They should do something about the acronym though ;-)

1 2

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · Jun 19

"Defining deliberation for dual-process models of reasoning" is now published. Free online access to the published Nat Rev Psy version: rdcu.be/erM5T

8 16

Reposted by Wim De Neys

ninafraniatte.bsky.social @ninafraniatte.bsky.social · Jun 17

🚨Check out our new paper with @boissinesther.bsky.social, Alexandra Delmas & @wimdeneys.bsky.social in Acta Psych!

📹 We show that video debiasing training can boost reasoning accuracy - not just deliberation, but intuition too!

🔓 Open access: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

Quick summary👇

1 3 5

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · May 8

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)

OSF

osf.io

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · May 8

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

1

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · May 8

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

1

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · May 8

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)

1

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · May 8

New forthcoming perspective paper in Nature Reviews Psychology: “Defining System 2 deliberation for dual-process models” preprint: osf.io/preprints/ps...
(1/5)

1 3 10

Reposted by Wim De Neys

Flavia Mancini @flaviamancini.bsky.social · Mar 8

How to push back against the rise of endless administrative burden in academia?

On the responsibilities of intellectuals and the rise of bullshit jobs in universities

You may never have considered yourself to be one. Why would you? But if you’re reading this, there is more than a likelihood that you are one. If you’re a

academic.oup.com

6 20

Wim De Neys @wimdeneys.bsky.social · Mar 4

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