Skip to main content

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

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, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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

  1. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  6. 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 

  7. 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 

  8. 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 

  9. 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 

  10. 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 

  11. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  13. 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 

  14. 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 

  15. 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 

  16. 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 

  17. 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 

  18. 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 

  19. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 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 

  22. 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 

  23. 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 

  24. 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 

  25. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 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 

  30. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  32. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 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.

  35. 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 

  36. 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 

  37. 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 

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

  39. 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 

  40. 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 

  41. 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 

  42. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  44. 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 

  45. 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 

  46. 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 

  47. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  52. 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 

  53. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 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 

  56. 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 

  57. 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 

  58. 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 

  59. 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.

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 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 

  63. 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 

  64. 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 

  65. 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 

  66. 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 

  67. 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 

  68. 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 

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

  70. 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 

  71. 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 

  72. 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 

  73. 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 

  74. 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 

  75. 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 

  76. 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 

  77. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  79. 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 

  80. 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 

  81. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  84. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. 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 

  87. 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 

  88. 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 

  89. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. 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 

  92. 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 

  93. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. 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 

  96. 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 

  97. 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 

  98. 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 

  99. 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 

  100. 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 

  101. 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 

  102. 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 

  103. 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 

  104. 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 

  105. 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 

  106. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  110. 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 

  111. 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 

  112. 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 

  113. 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 

  114. 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 

  115. 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 

  116. 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 

  117. 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 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  119. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  121. 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 

  122. 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 

  123. 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 

  124. 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 

  125. 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 

  126. 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 

  127. 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 

  128. 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 

  129. 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 

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

  131. 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 

  132. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. 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 

  135. 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 

  136. 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 

  137. 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 

  138. 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 

  139. 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 

  140. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  142. 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 

  143. 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 

  144. 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 

  145. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  147. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  149. 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 

  150. 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 

  151. 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 

  152. 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 

  153. 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 

  154. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  156. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  158. 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 

  159. 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 

  160. 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.

  161. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  164. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  166. 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 

  167. 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 

  168. 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 

  169. 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 

  170. 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 

  171. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  174. 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 

  175. 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 

  176. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  178. 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

Affiliations

Authors

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

Keywords

  • Dual systems
  • Dual process models
  • Judgment and decision making
  • Heuristics and biases
  • Attitudes
  • Persuasion
  • Attitude change
  • Consumer behavior
  • Impulsive buying
  • Marketing psychology