Multidimensional intuitive-analytic thinking style and its relation to moral concerns- epistemically suspect beliefs- and ideology

Abstract

Literature highlights the distinction between intuitive and analytic thinking as a prominent cognitive style distinction leading to the proposal of various theories within the framework of the dual process model. However it remains unclear whether individuals differ in their thinking styles along a single dimension from intuitive to analytic or if other dimensions are at play. Moreover the presence of numerous thinking style measures employing different terminology but conceptually overlapping leads to confusion. To address these complexities Newton et al. suggested the idea that individuals vary across multiple dimensions of intuitive-analytic thinking styles and distinguished thinking styles between 4 distinct types: Actively open-minded thinking close-minded thinking preference for effortful thinking and preference for intuitive thinking. They proposed a new measure for this 4-factor disposition The 4-Component Thinking Styles Questionnaire (4-CTSQ) to comprehensively capture the psychological outcomes related to thinking styles, however no independent test exists. In the current pre-registered studies we test the validity of 4-CTSQ for the first time beyond the original study and examine the association of the proposed measure with various factors including morality conspiracy beliefs paranormal and religious beliefs vaccine hesitancy and ideology in an underrepresented culture Turkiye. We found that the correlated 4-factor model of 4-CTSQ is an appropriate measure to capture individual differences based on cognitive style. The results endorse the notion that cognitive style differences are characterized by distinct structures rather than being confined to two ends of a single continuum.