Age and gender differences in preferences for rational and experiential thinking

Abstract

Cognitive-Experiential Self Theory assumes that reasoning conforms to a parallel dual processing model (comprising rational and experiential systems), through which we make sense of the world. The Rational Experiential Inventory was developed to measure an individual’s preference for rational (need for cognition) and experiential (faith in intuition) thinking, with individual differences proposed to influence the respective dominance of each. While small but consistent gender effects have been found previously, age effects have rarely been reported or investigated across the lifespan. We examine both age and gender differences in Rational Experiential Inventory scores, using combined data from five studies involving adult participants (n = 520, 61.9% male) with a mean age of 41.45 years (SD = 11.73, range 20–74 years). Results suggest a convergence of the rational and experiential systems in adulthood, although the timing may be different for women and men. In later adulthood, the relationship appears to diverge again.

Introduction

Cognitive-Experiential Self Theory (CEST) assumes that reasoning conforms to a parallel dual processing model (Epstein, 1994, Epstein, 2003). According to CEST, there are two systems through which we make sense of the world (rational and experiential). The rational system operates using rules of logic and evidence, encoding reality in symbols, words and numbers that are transmitted culturally (e.g., through education). It demands higher levels of cognitive resources and is considered to be slow, analytic and deliberate. This system mediates behaviour by the conscious appraisal of events. In comparison, the experiential system is innate and adaptive, enabling us to learn from experience. It mediates behaviour by encoding previous outcomes, particularly those related to the experience of affect, leading to the avoidance of negative, and facilitation of positive, emotions.

The main tenet of CEST is that individuals interpret the world through the simultaneous use of these two systems. A critical concept is that often there is a conflict between the rational and experiential, with the relative dominance of either influenced by a range of situational (environmental) and dispositional (individual) factors. The former include the social, economic, administrative and organisational contexts in which reasoning occurs, while the latter embrace discrete and interrelated psychosocial characteristics (e.g., attitudes, values, affect, knowledge and skills) that include cognition (Burns and D’Zurilla, 1999, Epstein, 1994, Isen et al., 1987, Kahneman, 2003, Sinclair and Ashkanasy, 2005).

The Rational Experiential Inventory (REI) was developed to measure an individual’s preferences for the rational (need for cognition) and experiential (faith in intuition) systems (Epstein et al., 1996, Pacini and Epstein, 1999) and has been used in a wide range of contexts. Higher need for cognition has been associated with aspects of personality and psychological adjustment such as dominance, self esteem, math and verbal abilities, academic performance, lower depression and state-trait anxiety, less stress among college students (Epstein et al., 1996), and lower perceived anthrax poisoning risk and apprehension (Berger, Johnson, & Lee, 2003). Both lower need for cognition and higher faith in intuition respectively, have been associated with creativity, a more positive attitude toward organic foods, less positive attitudes toward genetically modified foods, paranormal beliefs and more positive attitudes toward and use of complementary and alternative medicines (Lindeman & Aarnio, 2006; Lindeman and Aarnio, 2006, Saher et al., 2006, Wheeler and Hyland, 2005). Higher faith in intuition has been associated with less clinical guideline concordant behaviours among doctors with respect to treating acute coronary syndromes, but with a higher observed hand hygiene compliance rate (Sladek et al., 2008, Sladek et al., 2008, Sladek and Phillips, 2008). This growing body of research has consistently supported both the reliability of the REI, and the validity of need for cognition and faith in intuition as independent constructs (Epstein, 2003, Handley et al., 2000, Newstead et al., 2004).

Small but significant gender effects have been frequently reported, with women preferring experiential reasoning, and men preferring a more rational style (Epstein, 2003). For example, in (Epstein et al.’s) initial study (1996), effect sizes (Cohen’s d) for those findings were 0.53 and 0.31, respectively. However the influence of age is comparatively unreported. The youngest sample found in published studies (that used both scales of the Rational Experiential Inventory) reported that young adults (M = 20.23 years, SD = 1.28) scored significantly higher on need for cognition than adolescents (M = 16.78 years, SD = 0.83) (Klaczynski & Lavallee, 2005). However most ‘adult’ studies have used only college students, thus effectively restricting the age profile of participants to commonly between 20 and 30 years (Berger et al., 2003, Genovese, 2006, Klaczynski and Lavallee, 2005, Lindeman and Aarnio, 2006, Pacini and Epstein, 1999, Saher et al., 2006, Shiloh et al., 2002, Wolfradt et al., 1999). Further, age is not always reported (Epstein et al., 1996, Levin et al., 2002, Newstead et al., 2004, Pacini et al., 1998, Raidl and Lubart, 2000, Toplak and Stanovich, 2002). One notable exception is an investigation using a British sample drawn from the general population, as opposed to a university population, in which age was not related to Rational Experiential Inventory scores for 148 adults (modal age range = 41–50 years) (Handley et al., 2000).

Despite the modest empirical evidence, it remains a theoretical assumption of CEST that the relative influence of the rational and experiential modes changes with age, with the rational mode presumed to exercise more control from childhood to maturity (Epstein, 1985, Epstein, 2003). Evidence from other research on the development of brain systems may support this proposal. However, even if this assumption were true, the precise nature of the change is likely to be complex. There is currently insufficient evidence about changes to such cognitive processing in adulthood. It might be that the relationships between rational and experiential processing established at maturity continue throughout the lifespan. Alternatively, change may only be to a ‘point’ of cognitive maturity. Conversely, perhaps there is increasing integration between the two modes in adulthood, which would be reflected in a positive relationship between need for cognition and faith in intuition in older samples (Epstein et al., 1996). It may even be that there is an interaction between gender and maturity such that this putative relationship is identifiable at a different stage for men and women. Finally, this may occur in precisely the same age range reported in existing studies (20–30 years), making it difficult to generalise research findings to older age groups. A further complication in understanding the influence of age is that acculturation (e.g., through education, or as might occur during the transition from novice to expert) has been proposed to shift the balance of influence in the opposite direction (i.e., from the rational to the experiential mode) (Epstein, 1985).

We have used the REI in five separate studies (two as yet unpublished) exploring the potential of CEST to inform strategies for changing health worker behaviours (Sladek and Phillips, 2008, Sladek et al., 2008, Sladek et al., 2008). For example, a positive relationship between faith in intuition and greater hand hygiene compliance by hospital doctors was demonstrated, with no significant relationships found for need for cognition (Sladek, Bond, et al., 2008). These results were consistent with CEST which assumes that through repetition, rational mode activities may become proceduralised (habitualised), and thus shift to the control of the experiential mode. This makes adaptive sense, as well-rehearsed thoughts and actions thus use less cognitive resources (Epstein, 2003). Findings thus supported a theoretically driven conclusion that hand hygiene promotion programmes should target the experiential mode to improve compliance. Our total combined dataset (from all five studies) represents a sample including qualified doctors, senior nurses and health managers, and students enroled in the first year of a postgraduate medical course. By aggregating these samples, we have data for the REI with more age variance than any previous study.

The current report had three objectives. The first was to document the absolute scores for need for cognition and faith in intuition for men and women from a large and relatively heterogeneous sample. It is speculated that, consistent with previous research (Epstein, 2003), men will score higher on need for cognition, while women will score higher on faith in intuition. The second objective was to examine the relationship between age and need for cognition and faith in intuition, respectively. As noted above, little data are currently available to allow definitive comment to be made on the expected pattern of results. The relationship between participant group (e.g., medical students, senior registered nurses) and need for cognition and faith in intuition will also be reported to allow a comparison of the effect of age per se, as opposed to education/employment. The third objective was to examine associations between need for cognition and faith in intuition, and it was possible to propose that these thinking dispositions would become increasingly positively correlated with increasing age (Pacini & Epstein, 1999). Male and female data were considered separately.