A study published in the journal Thinking & Reasoning views doubt not merely as a state of uncertainty, but as an independent emotional mechanism that influences how a person thinks and makes decisions.
But the problem is that the brain seeks to conserve energy, and often relies on quick intuitive solutions rather than deep analysis.
In cognitive psychology, two patterns of thinking are usually distinguished: the first is intuitive thinking, which is quick, spontaneous, and requires little effort; the second is analytical thinking, which is slower and requires greater focus and cognitive resources.
But the fundamental question is: how does the brain determine that intuition is insufficient and that it needs to activate analytical thinking?
The study's authors—Cedric Courtial, Jerome Prado and Serge Caparrós—proposed an alternative to the traditional metacognitive control model.
The classical model assumes that a person logically evaluates the validity of the answer and then chooses the appropriate thinking strategy. However, the new hypothesis suggests that the decisive factor is the emotional response.
According to this view, doubt is not merely "uncertainty," but rather an internal feeling of unease that arises when the first intuitive answer conflicts with the demands of logic, leading to a disruption in the thought process and the emergence of internal discomfort.
In the experiments, participants were presented with logical problems in the form of syllogisms consisting of two premises and a conclusion.
In some tasks, the intuitive response differed from the logical conclusion. For example, the result might seem intuitively convincing but logically incorrect. Participants were given a limited time to respond and then asked to rate their level of doubt, anxiety, and discomfort.
The results showed that when intuition and logic conflict, feelings of doubt and anxiety increase significantly.
In a subsequent experiment, the initial response time was reduced to a few seconds to capture the purely intuitive response, and participants were then given unlimited time to reconsider their answers.
Did the participant change their initial answer?
How long did it take to rethink?
Did he indicate that he used conscious analysis?
The results showed that the stronger the feeling of doubt after the first answer, the more likely the participants were to move on to a deeper analysis and modify their decisions.
