Bago B, & De Neys W (2019). The smart System 1: Evidence for the intuitive nature of correct responding on the bat-and-ball problem. Thinking & Reasoning, 25(3), 257-299.
Bago B, De Neys W Fast logic?: Examining the time course assumption of dual process theory. Cognition. 2017 Jan;158:90-109. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.014. Epub 2016 Nov 4.
Ball, L J.; Thompson, V. A., & Stupple, E. J.N. (2017). Con?ict and dual process theory: the case of belief bias. In W. De Neys (Ed.), Dual Process Theory 2.0 (pp. 100-120). Oxon, UK: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315204550-7
Banks, A (2017). Comparing dual process theories: Evidence from event-related potentials. In W. De Neys (Ed.), Dual Process Theory 2.0 (pp. 66-81). Oxon, UK: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315204550-5
De Neys W, Vartanian O, Goel V Smarter than we think: when our brains detect that we are biased. Psychol Sci. 2008 May;19(5):483-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02113.x.
De Neys W Bias and Conflict: A Case for Logical Intuitions. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012 Jan;7(1):28-38. doi: 10.1177/1745691611429354. Epub 2012 Jan 5.
De Neys, W (Ed.) (2017). Dual Process Theory 2.0. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Evans JS, Stanovich KE Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition: Advancing the Debate. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2013 May;8(3):223-41. doi: 10.1177/1745691612460685.
Frederick, S (2005) Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic perspectives, 19(4), 25-42.
Newman IR, Gibb M, Thompson VA Rule-based reasoning is fast and belief-based reasoning can be slow: Challenging current explanations of belief-bias and base-rate neglect. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2017 Jul;43(7):1154-1170. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000372. Epub 2017 Feb 13.
Pennycook G, Fugelsang JA, Koehler DJ What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cogn Psychol. 2015 Aug;80:34-72. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.05.001. Epub 2015 Jun 16.
Pennycook, G (2017). A perspective on the theoretical foundation of dual process models. In W. De Neys (Ed.), Dual Process Theory 2.0 (pp. 5-27). Oxon, UK: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315204550-2
Prado J, Chadha A, Booth JR The brain network for deductive reasoning: a quantitative meta-analysis of 28 neuroimaging studies. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Nov;23(11):3483-97. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00063. Epub 2011 May 13.
Prado J, Noveck IA Overcoming perceptual features in logical reasoning: a parametric functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J Cogn Neurosci. 2007 Apr;19(4):642-57.
Stollstorff M, Vartanian O, Goel V Levels of conflict in reasoning modulate right lateral prefrontal cortex. Brain Res. 2012 Jan 5;1428:24-32. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2011.05.045. Epub 2011 May 25.
Thompson VA, Prowse Turner JA, Pennycook G Intuition, reason, and metacognition. Cogn Psychol. 2011 Nov;63(3):107-40. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.06.001. Epub 2011 Jul 27.
Thompson, V A., & Newman, I. (2017). Logical intuitions and other conundra for dual process theories. In W. De Neys (Ed.), Dual Process Theory 2.0 (pp. 121-136). Oxon, UK: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315204550-8
Trippas, D , & Handley, S. (2017). The parallel processing model of belief bias: Review and extensions. In W. De Neys (Ed.), Dual Process Theory 2.0 (pp. 28-46). Oxon, UK: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315204550-3
Tversky A, Kahneman D Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science. 1974 Sep 27;185(4157):1124-31.
Vartanian O, Beatty EL, Smith I, Blackler K, Lam Q, Forbes S One-way traffic: The inferior frontal gyrus controls brain activation in the middle temporal gyrus and inferior parietal lobule during divergent thinking. Neuropsychologia. 2018 Sep;118(Pt A):68-78. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.02.024. Epub 2018 Feb 23.
Interventional studies are often prospective and are specifically tailored to evaluate direct impacts of treatment or preventive measures on disease.
Observational studies are often retrospective and are used to assess potential causation in exposure-outcome relationships and therefore influence preventive methods.
Expanded access is a means by which manufacturers make investigational new drugs available, under certain circumstances, to treat a patient(s) with a serious disease or condition who cannot participate in a controlled clinical trial.
Clinical trials are conducted in a series of steps, called phases - each phase is designed to answer a separate research question.
Phase 1: Researchers test a new drug or treatment in a small group of people for the first time to evaluate its safety, determine a safe dosage range, and identify side effects.
Phase 2: The drug or treatment is given to a larger group of people to see if it is effective and to further evaluate its safety.
Phase 3: The drug or treatment is given to large groups of people to confirm its effectiveness, monitor side effects, compare it to commonly used treatments, and collect information that will allow the drug or treatment to be used safely.
Phase 4: Studies are done after the drug or treatment has been marketed to gather information on the drug's effect in various populations and any side effects associated with long-term use.
