PERIODICALS OF IMPLICIT COGNITION (2008) Vol. 3, (1). Implicit Laboratory Association, Budapest, Hungary Managing Intuition I.: Why does intuition need to be educated? Balázs Aczél Implicit Laboratory Association; University of Cambridge Dept. of Experimental Psychology, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EB, United Kingdom [email protected] Abstract: Imagine that human intuition suggests the same good solution to everyone in every situation, or imagine that intuitive decisions are always much worse than conscious thinking. In these cases educating intuition would not have much use. In reality, however, intuition has its powers and perils, it can guide us to genuine creativity or can lead us astray from any sensible logic. Intuition is neither a hidden mystical sense, nor a curse upon human thinking. It is – if managed well – a potential to complement our limited conscious thinking, to lower the risk of errors in our decision-making, or to deal with complex problems in an uncertain world. To achieve this, all we need is to learn which of our intuitions are erroneous, and how to improve them. Keywords: experience-based learning, implicit/explicit knowledge, intuition. 1. What is intuition and what is it not? Insight is similar, but not the same as intuition. Insight is the sudden realisation of Intuition is an inevitable part of almost all a solution that was already known, but a decisions and judgments, it is one of the different perspective or cue was needed to sources of our knowledge. Inherited either retrieve it. Whereas, intuition is a function of from evolutionary history or acquired from the cognitive system that processes personal experience, this knowledge suggests environmental information in an automatic certain beliefs, interpretations or predictions way and builds up behavioural preferences about the world. In contrast to conscious before reaching consciousness (Polanyi, reasoning, intuitive responses reach 1964; Reber et al., 2007). conscious awareness with little apparent effort from a consciously unavailable knowledge (Dienes & Perner, 1999). 2. Can intuition ever be better than conscious thinking? Speed and confidence are often associated with intuition, however, these are not Although common belief and numerous necessary correlates (Hogarth, 2001). popular books (e.g., Claxton, 1997; Intuition can be an impression building up Gigerenzer, 2007; Gladwell, 2005; Myers, gradually, often in conflict with our 2002) propagate the prevailing power of conscious thoughts abandoning us in intuitive thinking, firm scientific evidence consequent puzzlement. show that our most frequent decisional mistakes are rooted in the systematic biases HU ISSN 1788-8336 1 Aczel: Managing Intuition I. of our intuitions (Kahneman & Tversky, accepted explicit knowledge easily becomes 1979). Conscious, analytical thinking has the common-sense, intuitively obvious today advantage of its verifiable nature. An explicit and non-sense ‘tomorrow’ (Frantz, 2005). reasoning provides more security over our Experience-based learning provides a judgments for, in theory, it is based on facts dynamic and critical part of our intuition. It and available memory along with testable is dynamic because we are constantly steps in its argument. In practice, however, processing information about the this ideal state is rarely the case. In most frequencies of events in our environment everyday situations we are constrained to and we build up connections about the make decisions based on incomplete or perceived relatedness of the objects we noisy information under limited time. In meet. It is critical, because the inherent these cases we have to guess or to rely on strengths and weaknesses of intuition are previous experience or general knowledge. rooted in the validity of the learning The well known limitations of our attention environment (Hogarth, 2001). -a conscious working place - provides access only to a small amount of information to be In experience-based learning, we learn processed in consciousness (Miyake & Shah, automatically from observing connections 1999). However, it is assumed that a parallel between our actions and feedbacks from the automatic system of the brain also processes environment. This is a very powerful way of information in a distributed, less costly way learning, but it does not necessarily teach us (Sloman, 1996). the right lessons (Hogarth, 2001). To understand when learning is valid and when Intuition, therefore, is, on the one hand, it creates false beliefs, first, we should based on a broader automatic processing understand the general structure of how we which builds in several aspects of our learn from experience. experiential knowledge, but, on the other hand, it is not always reliable. At this point, According to the works of Robin Hogarth our questions arise: “Is there a way to decide (e.g., 2001, 2008), there are two main which of our intuitions are reliable?” and “Is variables that affect the quality of our there a way to improve our intuitions?”. learning from experience: the quality of Recent work in scientific psychology feedback and the consequence of errors. If suggests a confident ‘yes’ to both questions. the feedback of our (or others’) actions is To understand the argument behind these noisy, delayed, probabilistic or irrelevant suggestions, first, we have to step back and then the quality of the learning is poorer analyse what makes the difference between than when it is fast and accurate. A lenient good and bad intuition. environment provides approximate, but risk- free, feedback on accuracy. Learning will not be erroneous, but it will not be accurate 3. Where does intuition come from? either. An exacting environment can teach us much, but the knowledge will not be Our intuitive knowledge is partly based on necessarily relevant to our aims. Table 1. our natural reactions, a functionally demonstrates some examples for each of important inheritance of our evolutionary these categories. past (e.g. our perception of emotion) (Damasio, 1996). The acquired part of our intuition comes from either well-practised explicit knowledge that became automatic (expertise) or from experience. Widely PERIODICALS OF IMPLICIT COGNITION (2008) Volume 3, Issue 1 2 Aczel: Managing Intuition I. see how the feedback that we learn from can be misleading. By experience-based learning, intuition constantly and automatically gathers information about connections in Table 1. The learning structure in the world. This effortless way of learning experience-based learning. (based on has its cost since in experience-based Hogarth, 2001, pp. 88.) learning we can learn only from what we see, the system cannot utilise something that was Relevant-exacting: A professional golf player not observed (Hogarth, 2001). However, for receives immediate and highly accurate valid learning quite often we should know (exacting) feedback during training. The about what we do not see. To understand acquired knowledge will be valid, precisely the importance of this caveat, consider the what was aimed for (relevant). following example. A sales manager wants to motivate her sales staff to improve Irrelevant-exacting: Here the feedback can be performance. Anytime performance dangerously misleading. The example can be decreases she sends a blaming note to the the infamous physician from the early 20th individual. She most often notices an century who believed to diagnose patients increase in the sales next time. Experience- from tongue shape and texture by touching based learning builds up her knowledge them with his fingers. The patients spent about the connection between the action weeks in the infected ward going through and the outcome, supporting the original the procedure again and again until they hypothesis of the manager that blaming is eventually got infected with the typhoid motivating. Her intuition will suggest fever. The physician got strongly reinforced blaming anytime she notices a decline in that his intuitive skill was right (Thomas, performance (Hogarth, 2001). 1983). The manager motivates Performance Relevant-lenient: For instance, in the case of her sales staff by walking down a corridor you do not have to increase decrease be very precise with your steps, it is enough to keep the direction, your errors cannot be Sending a blaming note a b too costly (Hogarth, 2001). Using other means c d Irrelevant-lenient: In the case of most superstitious behaviour learning may be invalid, but you do not realise it, because it Table 2. The environmental structure of has no real effect on you: for example, not experience-based learning in the example of crossing the street after seeing a black cat. motivating sales staff (based on Hogarth, This false belief is mostly harmless, but can 2001, pp. 84., 123-125.) also lead to unfounded confidence. This intuition will, however, be biased by two serious fallacies. One peril of this 4. When is better to use intuition than knowledge is that using other means was conscious analysis? never tested. For valid learning she should compare a/(a+b) and c/(c+d) (Table 2.). To identify when our intuition gives She never tested any cases of c, although advantageous advice to us, first, we should there might be much more effective means to help increase performance than blaming PERIODICALS OF IMPLICIT COGNITION (2008) Volume 3, Issue 1 3 Aczel: Managing Intuition I. (e.g., sending them to intuition training). On mistakes could bring similarly serious the other hand, the observed connection consequences. might be an illusory correlation (Chapman & Chapman, 1969). If, in reality, sales are A further question is how accurate intuition affected mainly by random events, they will needs to be. To assess the accuracy of follow the probabilistic phenomena called judgment is not always that straightforward. regression towards the mean. According to this, The few studies in the scientific literature in most of the cases performance will (e.g., Kleinmuntz, 1990; Sawyer, 1966) show increase after a decay (Kahneman & that analytical methods, on average, bring Tversky, 1973). Blaming has maybe nothing about more accurate and more reliable to do with future performance. predictions than human judges – provided with the same information.