Logic or intuition?

If we reflect for a moment, making decisions is something that happens often throughout the day. Whether we're in the car, at the supermarket, or at work, there are situations that require us to make choices. Making a decision follows the process of reasoning, which involves all the "things" that the mind does to analyze the starting situation and evaluate which of the possible outcomes is the most appropriate.

But how do we reason? And how should we reason? It would probably be very nice if we could make the correct decision in every situation. However, we know that's not the case. Unless we are skilled in a subject called logic, we may find ourselves making decisions that rely more on intuition, taking a shortcut. In psychology, these shortcuts are known as heuristics of thought.

We have defined two ways of making decisions, which (with a lot of imagination) are called System 1 and System 2.

• System 1 is the one of heuristics. It is a fast system, it doesn't consume energy, and it answers questions based on our past experiences (what we could call intuition). 
• System 2 is the one of logical reasoning. It analyzes the problem, studies it, and seeks the best solution. Therefore, it is a slow system that requires energy. 

We mentioned that System 1 (the one of heuristics) uses shortcuts, so it can make mistakes, and research shows that it often does. Not only that, research also reveals that the way it makes mistakes is predictable, so we can anticipate the errors we will make. Let's use an example that should simplify the concept.

A craftsman comes to do a job at your house, and at the end of the work, the sly one says, "150 euros with a receipt, 100 euros without a receipt." The 50 euros in savings are immediate and certain, and the possibility that by behaving well in the future I will have a financial benefit is too low, so we know how most of us will respond.

But if we know the errors we make, can't we use them? This was the bet of two authors (Thaler and Sunstein) who introduced the theory of Nudge. The underlying idea is: if we know that System 1 will make that type of error in a certain situation, can't we create artificially situations where System 1 will repeatedly fall into it? 

This is the idea behind cashback, providing a quick way to save. It's no different from what the crafty craftsman proposed. However, cashback is a legal system. So, in this way, a little push is given to the consumer to choose the socially/legal desirable solution with the intention of addressing/resolving the problem of tax evasion.

Do you trust your intuition or do you prefer to analyze situations?

If you want me to describe in my own words a topic of psychology, please request it in the comment section.

Sources: Kahneman & Tversky (1974) - Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Thaler & Sunstein (2009) - Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness.