Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Two minds, three ways: dual system and dual process models in consumer psychology

  • Published:
AMS Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dual system and dual process views of the human mind have contrasted automatic, fast, and non-conscious with controlled, slow, and conscious thinking. This paper integrates duality models from the perspective of consumer psychology by identifying three relevant theoretical strands: Persuasion and attitude change (e.g. Elaboration Likelihood Model), judgment and decision making (e.g. Intuitive vs. Reflective Model), as well as buying and consumption behavior (e.g. Reflective-Impulsive Model). Covering different aspects of consumer decision making, we discuss the conditions under which different types of processes are evoked, how they interact and how they apply to consumers’ processing of marketing messages, the evaluation of product-related information, and purchasing behavior. We further compare and contrast theoretical strands and incorporate them with the literature on attitudes, showing how duality models can help us understand implicit and explicit attitude formation in consumer psychology. Finally, we offer future research implications for scholars in consumer psychology and marketing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The distinction between dual process and dual systems theories is mainly one of scope, with dual systems views essentially conceptualizing the operations of two “minds” under which dual processes are subsumed.

  2. As of October 2012, a Google Scholar search for the keywords ‘Petty Elaboration Likelihood’ returned 17,200 results, and only 7,560 for a search with keywords ‘Chaiken Heuristic Systematic’.

  3. The judgment and decision making area of research has given rise to other dual process models, most notably ‘fuzzy trace’ theory (Reyna 2004). This model’s origins were relatively specialized and domain-specific (risk perception in the domain of health) and it has to our knowledge not been adopted by researchers interested in consumer decision making.

  4. In option framing, consumers tend to choose a higher number of options when using a delete mode (starting from a fully loaded model, then removing undesirable options) vs. an add mode (starting from a base model, and then adding desirable options). A study by Biswas (2009) showed this bias to be more pronounced when participants were motivated to make decisions in a strictly emotional rather than a logical manner.

  5. PDP is a methodological tool designed to separate the contributions from automatic and controlled processes by means of an inclusion condition (both processes acting together) and exclusion condition (processes acting separately). Whereas problems used in judgment research are usually exclusion problems (a S1 response is in opposition to a S2 response, for example, one product with a high base failure rate resembling another product with a lower rate), inclusion versions can be constructed by changing the original version so that S1 and S2 judgments lead to the same response output.

References

  • Aarts, H., Dijksterhuis, A., & De Vries, P. (2001). On the psychology of drinking: being thirsty and perceptually ready. British Journal of Psychology, 92(4), 631–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agnoli, F. (1991). Development of judgmental heuristics and logical reasoning: training counteracts the representativeness heuristic. Cognitive Development, 6(2), 195–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 411–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albarracín, D., Wang, W., Li, H., & Noguchi, K. (2008). Structure of attitudes: Judgments, memory, and implications for change. In W. Crano & R. Prislin (Eds.), Attitudes and attitude change (pp. 19–40). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allport, G. W. (1935). Attitudes. In C. Murchinson (Ed.), A handbook of social psychology. Worcester: Clark University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbey, A. K., & Sloman, S. A. (2007). Base-rate respect: from ecological rationality to dual processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(3), 241–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A. (2002). Losing consciousness: automatic influences on consumer judgment, behavior, and motivation. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 280–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). The automaticity of social behavior: direct effects of trait concept and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister, R. F., Sparks, E. A., Stillman, T. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2008). Free will in consumer behavior: self-control, ego depletion, and choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18, 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betsch, T., Plessner, H., Schwieren, C., & Gütig, R. (2001). I like it but I don’t know why: a value-account approach to implicit attitude formation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 242–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biswas, D. (2009). The effects of option framing on consumer choices: Making decisions in rational vs. experiential processing modes. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 8, 284–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., & Engel, J. F. (2006). Consumer behavior (3rd ed.). Mason: Thomson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bless, H. (2001). Mood and the use of general knowledge structures. In L. L. Martin & G. L. Clore (Eds.), Theories of mood and cognition: A users handbook (pp. 9–28). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonner, C., & Newell, B. R. (2010). In conflict with ourselves? An investigation of heuristic and analytic processes in decision making. Memory & Cognition, 38(2), 186–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brannon, L. A., & Brock, T. C. (2001). Scarcity claims elicit extreme responding to persuasive messages: role of cognitive elaboration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(3), 365–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burson, K. A., Larrick, R. P., & Lynch, J. G., Jr. (2009). Six of one, half dozen of the other: expanding and contracting numerical dimensions produces preference reversals. Psychological Science, 20(9), 1074–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Morris, K. J. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(4), 805–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carruthers, P. (2012). The fragmentation of reasoning. In P. Quintanilla (Ed.), La coevolución de mente y lenguaje: Ontogénesis y filogénesis. Lima: Fondo Editorial de la Pontificia Universidad. Católica del Perú. Retrieved from http://www.philosophy.umd.edu/Faculty/pcarruthers/TheFragmentationofReasoning.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic vs. systematic information processing and the use of source vs/ message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chartrand, T. L. (2005). The role of conscious awareness in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(3), 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: the perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(6), 893–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun, W. Y., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2006). The role of task demands and processing resources in the use of base-rate and individuating information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(2), 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coulter, K. S., & Coulter, R. A. (2005). Size does matter: the effects of magnitude representation congruency on price perceptions and purchase likelihood. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(1), 64–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czellar, S., Voyer, B., Schwob, A., & Luna, D. (2009). Whence brand evaluations? Investigating the relevance of personal and extrapersonal associations in brand attitudes. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 681–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darke, P. R., & Ritchie, R. J. B. (2007). The defensive consumer: advertising deception, defensive processing, and distrust. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(1), 114–127. doi:10.1509/jmkr.44.1.114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Neys, W., & Glumicic, T. (2008). Conflict monitoring in dual process theories of thinking. Cognition, 106(3), 1248–1299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. (1994). Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: when people behave against their better judgment. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 66(5), 819–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, R., & Strack, F. (2006). Duality models in social psychology: response to commentaries. Psychological Inquiry, 17(3), 265–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, R., & Strack, F. (2008). Variants of judgment and decision making: The perspective of the Reflective-Impulsive Model. In H. Plessner, C. Betsch, & T. Betsch (Eds.), Intuition in judgment and decision making (pp. 39–53). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijksterhuis, A., Smith, P. K., van Baaren, R. B., & Wigboldus, D. H. J. (2005). The unconscious consumer: effects of environment on consumer behaviour. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(3), 193–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. San Diego: Hartcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elaad, E., Sayag, N., & Ezer, A. (2010). Effects of anchoring and adjustment in the evaluation of product pricing. Psychological Reports, 107(1), 58–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist, 49(8), 709–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S., & Pacini, R. (1999). Some basic issues regarding dual-process theories from the perspective of cognitive–experiential self-theory. In S. Chaiken, & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 462–482). New York: Guilford Press.

  • Evans, J. St. B. T. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(10), 454–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. St. B. T. (2007). On the resolution of conflict in dual process theories of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 13(4), 321–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. St. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. St. B. T., & Over, D. E. (1996). Rationality and reasoning. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

  • Faber, R. J., & Vohs, K. D. (2004). To buy or not to buy? Self-control and self-regulatory failure in purchase behavior. In K. D. Vohs & R. F. Baumeister (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research theory, and applications (pp. 509–524). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fazio, R. H., & Williams, C. J. (1986). Attitude accessibility as a moderator of the attitude-perception and attitude-behavior relations: an investigation of the 1984 presidential election. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(3), 505–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feick, L. F., & Price, L. L. (1987). The market maven: a diffuser of marketplace information. Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, M. B., Garcia-Marques, L., Sherman, S. J., & Sherman, J. W. (2006). Automatic and controlled components of judgment and decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 797–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston: Row Peterson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finucane, M. L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2000). The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Middlestadt, S. (1995). Noncognitive effects on attitude formation and change: fact or artifact? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4(2), 181–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Middlestadt, S. (1997). A striking lack of evidence for nonbelief-based attitude formation and change: a response to five commentaries. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 6(1), 107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florack, A., Friese, M., & Scarabis, M. (2010). Regulatory focus and reliance on implicit preferences in consumption contexts. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(2), 193–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folkes, V. S. (1988). The availability heuristic and perceived risk. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(1), 13–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankish, K., & Evans, J. S. B. T. (2009). The duality of mind: an historical perspective. In J. S. B. T. Evans & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 1–29). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S. (1989). Civilization and its discontents. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friese, M., & Hofmann, W. (2009). Control me or I will control you: impulses, trait self-control, and the guidance of behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(5), 795–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friese, M., Hofmann, W., & Wänke, M. (2008). When impulses take over: moderated predictive validity of explicit and implicit attitude measures in predicting food choice and consumption behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(3), 397–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fudenberg, D., & Levine, D. K. (2006). A dual-self model of impulse control. The American Economic Review, 96(5), 1449–1476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gailliot, M. T., & Baumeister, R. F. (2007). The physiology of willpower: linking blood glucose to self-control. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(4), 303–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: an integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 692–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2011). The associative-propositional evaluation model: theory, evidence, and open questions. In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 59–125). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103(4), 650–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillard, E., Van Dooren, W., Schaeken, W., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Processing time evidence for a default-interventionist model of probability judgments. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1792-1797). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (Eds.). (2002). Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, D. G., & Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Models of ecological rationality: the recognition heuristic. Psychological Review, 109(1), 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, and attitude change. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., Rudman, L. A., Farnham, S. D., Nosek, B. A., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109(1), 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greifeneder, R., & Bless, H. (2007). Relying on accessible content vs accessibility experiences: the case of processing capacity. Social Cognition, 25(6), 853–881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, D., Gonzalez, R., & Varey, C. (2001). The heuristics and biases approach to judgment under uncertainty. In A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intraindividual processes, vol. 1 (pp. 207–235). London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugtvedt, C. P., & Kasmer, J. A. (2008). Attitude change and persuasion. In C. P. Haugtvedt, P. M. Herr, & F. R. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 419–459). New York: Taylor & Francis/Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugtvedt, C. P., & Petty, R. E. (1992). Personality and persuasion: need for cognition moderates the persistence and resistance of attitude changes. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 63(2), 308–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haugtvedt, C. P., & Rucker, D. (2007). Multiple roles for brand name. Working paper. Fisher College of Business, Ohio State Universiy.

  • Hershfield, H. E., Goldstein, D. G., Sharpe, W. F., Fox, J., Yeykelis, L., Carstensen, L. L., et al. (2011). Increasing saving behavior through age-progressed renderings of the future self. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, S23–S37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. E. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133–168). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology, vol. 30 (pp. 1–46). San Diego: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, W., & Friese, M. (2008). Impulses got the better of me: alcohol moderates the influence of implicit attitudes toward food cues on eating behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117(2), 420–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, W., Gawronski, B., Gschwendner, T., Le, H., & Schmitt, M. (2005). A meta-analysis on the correlation between the Implicit Association Test and explicit self-report measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10), 1369–1385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, W., Gschwendner, T., Friese, M., Wiers, R. W., & Schmitt, M. (2008). Working memory capacity and self-regulation: toward an individual differences perspective on behavior determination by automatic vs. controlled processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 962–977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, W., Friese, M., & Strack, F. (2009). Impulse and self-control from a dual-systems perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(2), 162–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, D. J., & Barry, T. E. (1994). The role of thematic congruence between a mood-inducing event and an advertised product in determining the effects of mood on brand attitudes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 3(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyer, W. D., & MacInnis, D. J. (2003). Consumer behavior (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsee, C. K., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2004). Music, pandas, and muggers: on the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(1), 23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isen, A. M., Nygren, T. E., & Ashby, F. G. (1988). Influence of positive affect on the subjective utility of gains and losses – it is just not worth the risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(5), 710–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, J., & Kaas, K. P. (2002). Advertising in the mutual fund business: the role of judgmental heuristics in private investors’ evaluation of risk and return. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 7(2), 129–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: psychology for behavioral economics. The American Economic Review, 93(5), 1449–1475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics of intuitive judgment: Extensions and applications (pp. 49–81). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 430–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, Y. S., & Herr, P. M. (2006). Beauty and the beholder: toward an integrative model of communication source effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(1), 123–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kardes, F. R., Posavac, S. S., & Cronley, M. L. (2004). Consumer inference: a review of processes, bases, and judgment contexts. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(3), 230–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keren, G., & Schul, Y. (2009). Two is not always better than one: a critical evaluation of two-system theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(6), 533–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Epstein, S. (1992). Cognitive-experiential self theory and subjective probability: further evidence for two conceptual systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 534–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamurthy, P., & Sivaraman, A. (2002). Counterfactual thinking and advertising responses. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 650–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2005). The measurement of attitudes. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 21–76). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruglanski, A. W., & Orehek, E. (2007). Partitioning the domain of social inference: dual mode and systems models and their alternatives. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 291–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruglanski, A. W., Erb, H. P., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Chun, W. Y. (2006). On parametric continuities in the world of binary either ors. Psychological Inquiry, 17(3), 153–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2009). A dual-process model of interactivity effects. Journal of Advertising, 38(2), 53–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: a test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(2), 130–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maclnnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 53(4), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madzharov, A. V., & Block, L. G. (2010). Effects of product unit image on consumption of snack foods. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 398–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maheswaran, D., Mackie, D. M., & Chaiken, S. (1992). Brand name as a heuristic cue: the effects of task importance and expectancy confirmation on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(4), 317–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L. L., & Achee, J. W. (1992). Beyond accessibility: The role of processing objectives in judgment. In A. Tesser & L. Martin (Eds.), The construction of social judgment (pp. 195–216). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McElroy, T., & Dowd, K. (2007). Susceptibility to anchoring effects: how openness-to-experience influences responses to anchoring cues. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(1), 48–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menon, G., & Raghubir, P. (2003). Ease-of-retrieval as an automatic input in judgments: a mere-accessibility framework? Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 230–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J., & Mischel, W. (1999). A hot/cool-system analysis of delay of gratification: dynamics of willpower. Psychological Review, 106(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyers-Levy, J., & Maheswaran, D. (2004). Exploring message framing outcomes when systematic, heuristic, or both types of processing occur. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1 & 2), 159–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyers-Levy, J., & Malaviya, P. (1999). Consumers’ Processing of persuasive advertisements: an integrative framework of persuasion theories. Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mischel, W. (1974). Processes in delay of gratification. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 249–292). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mischel, W., & Baker, N. (1975). Cognitive appraisals and transformations in delay behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(2), 254–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Rodriguez, M. L. (1989). Delay of gratification in children. Science, 244(4907), 933–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, A. (1995). Price cue utilization in product evaluations: the moderating role of motivation and attribute information. Journal of Business Research, 33(3), 187–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monsell, S., & Driver, J. (2000). Control of cognitive processes. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. L., Hausknecht, D., & Thamodaran, K. (1986). Time compression, response opportunity, and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1), 85–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nenkov, G. Y., Inman, J. J., & Hulland, J. (2008). Considering the future: the conceptualization and measurement of elaboration on potential outcomes. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(1), 126–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas, D., Rowlands, I., Clark, D., & Williams, P. (2011). Google generation II: web behaviour experiments with the BBC. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 63(1), 28–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., Krantz, D. H., Jepson, C., & Kunda, Z. (1983). The use of statistical heuristics in everyday inductive reasoning. Psychological Review, 90(4), 339–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & McKendrick, J. (1999). The influence of in-store music on wine selections. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(2), 271–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oberauer, K., Suess, H.-M., Schulze, R., Wilhelm, O., & Wittmann, W. W. (2000). Working memory capacity: facets of a cognitive ability construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 29(6), 1017–1045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ofir, C., Raghubir, P., Brosh, G., Monroe, K. B., & Heiman, A. (2008). Memory-based store price judgments: the role of knowledge and shopping experience. Journal of Retailing, 84(4), 414–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2004). Reducing the influence of extrapersonal associations on the implicit association test: personalizing the IAT. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 653–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, J., Bettman, J., & Johnson, E. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., & Brinol, P. (2008). Persuasion: from single to multiple to metacognitive processes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(2), 137–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: the moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Kasmer, J. A. (1988). The role of affect in the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Donohew, H. E. Sypher, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Communication, social cognition, and affect, communication (pp. 117–146). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., Schumann, D. W., Richman, S. A., & Strathman, A. J. (1993). Positive mood and persuasion: different roles for affect under high-and low-elaboration conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(1), 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. T., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1997). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 48(1), 609–647. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2004). Ideals and oughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(4), 503–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2009). Contingent reliance on the affect heuristic as a function of regulatory focus. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(2), 267–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pham, M. T., & Higgins, E. T. (2005). Promotion and prevention in consumer decision making: the state of the art and theoretical propositions. In S. Ratneshwar & D. G. Mick (Eds.), Inside consumption: Consumer motives, goals, and desires (pp. 8–43). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratneshwar, S., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Comprehension’s role in persuasion: the case of its moderating effect on the persuasive impact of source cues. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(1), 52–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cognitive unconscious. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

  • Reinhard, M. A., & Sporer, S. L. (2008). Verbal and nonverbal behaviour as a basis for credibility attribution: the impact of task involvement and cognitive capacity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(3), 477–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reyna, V. F. (2004). How people make decisions that involve risk: a dual-processes approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(2), 60–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rook, D. W., & Fisher, R. J. (1995). Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 305–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rundle-Thiele, S., & Bennett, R. (2001). A brand for all seasons? A discussion of brand loyalty approaches and their applicability for different markets. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 10(1), 25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2006). Understanding implicit and explicit attitude change: a systems of reasoning analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(6), 995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanbonmatsu, D. M., & Kardes, F. R. (1988). The effects of physiological arousal on information processing and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 379–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanfey, A. G., & Chang, L. J. (2008). Multiple systems in decision making. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1128, 53–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, N. (2002). Situated cognition and the wisdom of feelings: Cognitive tuning. In L. Feldman Barrett & P. Salovey (Eds.), The wisdom in feeling (pp. 144–166). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Hilton, D., & Naderer, G. (1991). Base rates, representativeness, and the logic of conversation: the contextual relevance of “irrelevant” information. Social Cognition, 9(1), 67–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, J., & Zhou, R. (2007). Understanding impulsive choice behaviors: the motivational influences of regulatory focus. Journal of Marketing Research, 44, 297–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah, A. K., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). Heuristics made easy: an effort-reduction framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shampanier, K., Mazar, N., & Ariely, D. (2007). Zero as a special price: the true value of free products. Marketing Science, 26(6), 742–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., Sivakumaran, B., & Marshall, R. (2010). Impulse buying and variety seeking: a trait-correlates perspective. Journal of Business Research, 63(3), 276–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, J. W. (2006). On building a better process model: it’s not only how many, but which ones and by which means. Psychological Inquiry, 17(3), 173–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: the interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 278–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinaceur, M., Heath, C., & Cole, S. (2005). Emotional and deliberative reactions to a public crisis: mad cow disease in France. Psychological Science, 16(3), 247–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sloman, S. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 30–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). The affect heuristic. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 397–420). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24(2), 311–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Peters, E., Finucane, M. L., & MacGregor, D. G. (2005). Affect, risk, and decision making. Health Psychology, 24(4), S35–S40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2), 108–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spears, N., & Singh, S. N. (2004). Measuring attitude toward the brand and purchase intentions. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), 53–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, A., & Townsend, E. (2008). Spontaneous evaluations: similarities and differences between the affect heuristic and implicit attitudes. Cognition and Emotion, 22(1), 83–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staats, A. W. (1996). Personality and behavior: Psychological behaviorism. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: implications for the rationality debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(5), 645–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 220–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strack, F., Werth, L., & Deutsch, R. (2006). Reflective and impulsive determinants of consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(3), 205–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. (2004). High self control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72(2), 271–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M., & Morwitz, V. G. (2009). Heuristics in numerical cognition: Implications for pricing. In V. Rao, (Ed.), Handbook of pricing research in marketing (pp. 132–149). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

  • Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science (New Series), 185(4157), 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uncles, M. D., Dowling, G. R., & Hammond, K. (2003). Customer loyalty and customer loyalty programs. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20(4), 294–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underhill, P. (2008). Why we buy: The science of shopping. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2004). Understanding self-regulation: An introduction. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory and applications (pp. 3–10). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vohs, K. D., & Faber, R. J. (2007). Spent resources: self-regulatory resource availability affects impulse buying. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(4), 537–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wansink, B., Kent, R. J., & Hoch, S. J. (1998). An anchoring and adjustment model of purchase quantity decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(1), 71–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegener, D. T., Petty, R. E., & Smith, S. M. (1995). Positive mood can increase or decrease message scrutiny: the hedonic contingency view of mood and message processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(1), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 930–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, S. C., Petty, R. E., & Bizer, G. Y. (2005). Self-schema matching and attitude change: situational and dispositional determinants of message elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 787–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review, 107(1), 101–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, P. (1980). Message-evoked thoughts: persuasion research using thought verbalizations. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(2), 151–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav, M. S., & Seiders, K. (1998). Is the price right? Understanding contingent processing in reference price formation. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 311–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, C. W. M., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. (2004). Affect, appraisal, and consumer judgment. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 412–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youn, S., & Faber, R. J. (2000). Impulse buying: Its relation to personality traits and cues. In S. J. Hoch & R. J. Meyer (Eds.), Advances in consumer research, vol. 27 (pp. 179–185). Provo: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35(2), 151–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, R. B. (1997). Emotions. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 591–632). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We are grateful for the helpful feedback received from the anonymous reviewers and thank Malte Friese, Bianca Pryor, Anna Steidle, and Anila Masons for their comments on previous versions of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. London School of Economics & BrainJuicer Labs, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE, UK

    Alain Samson

  2. ESCP Europe Business School & London School of Economics, 527 Finchley Road, London, NW3 7BG, UK

    Benjamin G. Voyer

Authors
  1. Alain Samson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benjamin G. Voyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alain Samson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Samson, A., Voyer, B.G. Two minds, three ways: dual system and dual process models in consumer psychology. AMS Rev 2, 48–71 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-012-0030-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-012-0030-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation