Cognitive capacity is commonly assumed to predict performance in classic reasoning tasks because people higher in cognitive capacity are believed to be better at deliberately correcting biasing erroneous intuitions. However, recent findings suggest that there can also be a positive correlation between cognitive capacity and correct intuitive thinking. Here we present results from 2 studies that directly contrasted whether cognitive capacity is more predictive of having correct intuitions or successful deliberate correction of an incorrect intuition. We used a two-response paradigm in which people were required to give a fast intuitive response under time pressure and cognitive load and afterwards were given the time to deliberate. We used a direction-of change analysis to check whether correct responses were generated intuitively or whether they resulted from deliberate correction (i.e., an initial incorrect-to-correct final response change). Results showed that although cognitive capacity was associated with the correction tendency (overall r = 0.22) it primarily predicted correct intuitive responding (overall r = 0.44). These findings force us to rethink the nature of sound reasoning and the role of cognitive capacity in reasoning. Rather than being good at deliberately correcting erroneous intuitions, smart reasoners simply seem to have more accurate intuitions.

通常认为认知能力可以预测经典推理任务的表现，因为人们认为认知能力较高的人在故意纠正有偏见的错误直觉上会更好。但是，最近的发现表明，认知能力和正确的直觉思维之间也可能存在正相关。在这里，我们提出了2项研究的结果，这些结果直接对比了认知能力是否更能预测正确的直觉或成功的故意纠正错误的直觉。我们使用了两个响应的范式，其中要求人们在时间压力和认知负担下做出快速直观的响应，然后才有时间进行思考。我们使用了变化方向分析来检查是否可以直观地生成正确的响应，或者它们是否是经过有意的更正（例如，最初的不正确到正确的最终响应变化）。结果表明，尽管认知能力与矫正趋势有关（总体r  = 0.22），它主要预测了正确的直观响应（总体r  = 0.44）。这些发现迫使我们重新思考合理推理的本质以及认知能力在推理中的作用。聪明的推理者并没有善于故意纠正错误的直觉，而是似乎拥有更准确的直觉。