“Don’t cross the streams”: How regulatory modes relate to task performance that benefits from either reflective or intuitive thinking.

Wetheorize that individual differences in motivational tendencies may foster the use of different cognitive styles—such as more effortful, reflective thinking, or more intuitive thinking—which could either facilitate or interfere with performance on different cognitive tasks. In three studies, we investigate how stable preferences for the self-regulatory modes of locomotion (e.g., “I am a doer”) and assessment (e.g., “I am a critical person”; Kruglanski et al., 2000) affect performance on cognitive tasks that benefit from either intuitive thinking (Study 1, N =419) or reflective thinking (Study 2, N=506; Study 3, N=526). Locomotion is hypothesized to facilitate performance on intuitive tasks and to interfere with performance on reflective tasks. Conversely, assessment is hypothesized to facilitate performance on reflective tasks and to interfere with performance on intuitive tasks. Cross-sectional Studies 1 and 2 support the interference hypotheses only, showing negative associations between assessment and intuitive task performance (Study 1), and locomotion and reflective task performance (Study 2). In Study 3, in which we again measured regulatory mode and task performance, but additionally showed participants either locomotion- or assessment-related words as a situational cue manipulation for regulatory mode, the results supported both the facilitation and interference hypotheses. Results are discussed in the context of contemporary views on motivated cognition and self-regulation.