| Abstract [eng] |
The aim of this thesis is to estimate relative contributions of intuitive and rational information processing in domain-specific activities. Three studies were carried out. Study 1 and Study 2 examined anesthesiologists‘ (N = 84) and judges‘ (N = 98) decision-making, respectively. The appropriateness of decisions in the fields of medicine and criminal law can be assessed impartially according to their compliance with protocols and laws. Therefore, dual process dissociation procedure was applied for Study 1 and Study 2. Study 3 examined 18-24 year-old electorate‘s (N = 91) decision to vote for political parties in the Lithuanian parliamentary elections of 2016. Voting decisions does not have objective criteria for their correctness or fallibility. Therefore, the relative contributions of intuitive and rational information processing was estimated indirectly, based on voters‘ implicit and explicit attitudes toward political parties, respectively. It was found that the relative contributions of intuitive and rational information processing varies when decisions are made in different domain-specific activities. In particular, anesthesiologists rely more on intuitive (57.1%-76.2%) compared with rational information processing (14.3%-35.7%). Contrarily, judges rely more on rational (35.29%-53.19%) compared with intuitive information processing (8.51%-15.68%). Moreover, 18-24 year-old electorate is more likely to rely on explicit attitudes rather than implicit attitudes when deciding to vote for political parties. Indirectly, it indicates that 18-24 year-old electorate is more likely to rely on rational rather that intuitive information processing. Results are interpreted in the context of cognitive psychology. |
