IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sek/jijote/v8y2020i1p84-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cognitive Reflection Test - Next Generation

Author

Listed:
  • Anca Tamas

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

Abstract

Purpose ? The aim of this paper is to investigate the correlation between the short Cognitive Reflection Test and the long Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), the gender effect and the educational level effect on short CRT and long CRT, as well as the Granger causality between the two ones.Design / Methodology / Approach ? A statistical analyze was provided and econometric measures and tests were used, in EViews and SPSS, like the Pearson Correlation Coefficient and the Granger Causality. A critical assessment of literature review was made. For collecting the data, quantitative methods were used (questionnaires).Findings - There is a significant, strong and positive correlation between the short Cognitive Reflection Test version (short CRT) and the long version (long CRT), long CRT Granger causes short CRT, girls outperformed boys on each educational level.Practical implications - Long CRT could be an alternative for short CRT, which is now overexposed and widely known.Originality / Value - Once thinking system 2 is trigged by completing another questionnaire, the results on CRT in either version increased, even if the nature of the other questionnaire is completely different.Limitations ? The other questionnaire was administrated only for high school students. Future research should be conducted in order to trig the thinking system 2 before administrating the test for secondary school and university students too.

Suggested Citation

  • Anca Tamas, 2020. "Cognitive Reflection Test - Next Generation," International Journal of Teaching and Education, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences, vol. 8(1), pages 84-96, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sek:jijote:v:8:y:2020:i:1:p:84-96
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://iises.net/international-journal-of-teaching-education/publication-detail-22012
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://iises.net/international-journal-of-teaching-education/publication-detail-22012?download=6
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antonio Mastrogiorgio & Enrico Petracca, 2014. "Numerals as triggers of System 1 and System 2 in the ‘bat and ball’ problem," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 13(1), pages 135-148, June.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:99-113 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:20-33 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Giovanna Zanolla, 2018. "The gender gap in math. Evidences of a study in the primary school in the Swiss canton of Ticino," International Journal of Teaching and Education, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences, vol. 6(1), pages 103-125, April.
    5. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:3:p:182-191 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mastrogiorgio, Antonio & Petracca, Enrico, 2016. "Embodying rationality," MPRA Paper 74658, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Jesús F. Salgado & Inmaculada Otero & Silvia Moscoso, 2019. "Cognitive Reflection and General Mental Ability as Predictors of Job Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-16, November.
    3. Justin F. Landy, 2016. "Representations of moral violations: Category members and associated features," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(5), pages 496-508, September.
    4. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    5. David J. Cooper & Krista Saral & Marie Claire Villeval, 2021. "Why Join a Team?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6980-6997, November.
    6. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2019. "Digital Communication and Swift Trust," SciencePo Working papers Main halshs-02050514, HAL.
    7. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán Gonzalez & Ricardo Mateo, 2015. "Cognitive Reflection and the Diligent Worker: An Experimental Study of Millennials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, November.
    8. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    9. Luigi Guiso, 2015. "A Test of Narrow Framing and its Origin," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 1(1), pages 61-100, March.
    10. Breaban, Adriana & van de Kuilen, Gijs & Noussair, Charles, 2016. "Prudence, Personality, Cognitive Ability and Emotional State," Other publications TiSEM 9a01a5ab-e03d-49eb-9cd7-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    12. Fabian Herweg & Svenja Hippel & Daniel Müller & Fabio Römeis, 2024. "Axiom Preferences and Choice Mistakes under Risk," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 326, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    13. Fuchsman, Dillon & McGee, Josh B. & Zamarro, Gema, 2023. "Teachers’ willingness to pay for retirement benefits: A national stated preferences experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    14. Prokudina, Elena & Renneboog, Luc & Tobler, Philippe, 2015. "Does Confidence Predict Out-of-Domain Effort?," Discussion Paper 2015-055, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Jordi Brandts & Isabel Busom & Cristina Lopez-Mayan & Judith Panadés, 2022. "Images Say More Than Just Words: Effectiveness of Visual and Text Communication in Dispelling the Rent–Control Misconception," Working Papers 1322, Barcelona School of Economics.
    16. Noussair, C.N. & Tucker, S. & Xu, Yilong, 2014. "A Future Market Reduces Bubbles but Allows Greater Profit for More Sophisticated Traders," Other publications TiSEM 43ded173-9eee-48a4-8a15-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Johannes Abeler & Felix Marklein, 2017. "Fungibility, Labels, and Consumption," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 99-127.
    18. Ek, Claes, 2017. "Some causes are more equal than others? The effect of similarity on substitution in charitable giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 45-62.
    19. Lex Borghans & Angela Lee Duckworth & James J. Heckman & Bas ter Weel, 2008. "The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).
    20. Fellner, Gerlinde & Maciejovsky, Boris, 2007. "Risk attitude and market behavior: Evidence from experimental asset markets," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 338-350, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    short Cognitive Reflection Test; long Cognitive Reflection Test; thinking system 2;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • C02 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Mathematical Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sek:jijote:v:8:y:2020:i:1:p:84-96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klara Cermakova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ijote.iises.net/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.