The Mind’s Eye: How Eye Movements and Pupil Dilation Reveal Reasoning

Published on June 12, 2023

Imagine your mind is a detective, tirelessly working to solve the mysteries of reasoning. A hot topic in the world of cognitive science is the role of intuition in our thought processes. Some argue that intuitive thinking not only affects our judgment but is also sensitive to logical conflicts. In this study, researchers investigated conflict detection by examining eye movements and pupil dilation as participants made judgments about the validity or believability of conclusions. The results revealed that when faced with conflicting information, participants took longer to respond, experienced shifts in their gaze, and even had changes in pupil size. These findings support the notion that even though intuitive processes can sometimes lead us astray, they also possess an innate ability to detect logical inconsistencies. This new insight into the mind’s eye provides further evidence for the importance of understanding how intuition plays a role in our everyday decision-making. If you’re intrigued by this research, dive into the full article for a deeper understanding of the fascinating relationship between eye movements, pupil dilation, and reasoning.

Abstract
A controversial claim in recent dual process accounts of reasoning is that intuitive processes not only lead to bias but are also sensitive to the logical status of an argument. The intuitive logic hypothesis draws upon evidence that reasoners take longer and are less confident on belief–logic conflict problems, irrespective of whether they give the correct logical response. In this paper, we examine conflict detection under conditions in which participants are asked to either judge the logical validity or believability of a presented conclusion, accompanied by measures of eye movement and pupil dilation. The findings show an effect of conflict, under both types of instruction, on accuracy, latency, gaze shifts, and pupil dilation. Importantly, these effects extend to conflict trials in which participants give a belief-based response (incorrectly under logic instructions or correctly under belief instructions) demonstrating both behavioral and physiological evidence in support of the logical intuition hypothesis.

Read Full Article (External Site)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>