Methodological pitfalls of the Unconscious Thought paradigm

Abstract

According to Unconscious Thought Theory (UTT: Dijksterhuis & Nordgren, 2006), complex decisions are best made after a period of distraction assumed to elicit "unconscious thought". Over three studies, respectively offering a conceptual, an identical and a methodologically improved replication of Dijksterhuis et al. ( 2006), we reassessed UTT's predictions and dissected the decision task used to demonstrate these predictions. We failed to find any evidence for the benefits of unconscious decision-making. By contrast, we found some evidence that conscious deliberation can lead to better decisions. Further, we identified methodological weaknesses in the UTT decision task: ( a) attributes weighting was neglected although attributes were seen as different in importance; (b) the material was not properly counterbalanced; and ( c) there was some confusion in the experimental instructions. We propose methodological improvements that address these concerns.