Edited by Marta Sinclair
Gerard P. Hodgkinson and Eugene Sadler-Smith In recent decades the analysis of intuition and related non-conscious cognitive–affective processes has emerged as a legitimate subject of social scientific inquiry with important implications for educational, personal, medical and organizational decision making (Dane & Pratt, 2007, 2009; Hogarth, 2001; Hodgkinson et al., 2008, 2009a; Klein, 1998, 2003; Sadler-Smith, 2008, 2010). However, the elusive nature of the intuition construct raises particular methodological issues, and the purpose of this chapter is to offer a critical appraisal of alternative methods of assessment. Much of the recent methodological discourse pertaining to the study of intuition has centred on the relative merits of basic self-report instruments comprising attitudinal statements that purport to capture individual differences in preferences for intuitive and/or analytical processing (e.g., Allinson & Hayes, 1996; Betsch, 2008; Betsch & Iannello, 2010; Epstein et al., 1996; Hayes et al., 2003; Hodgkinson & Sadler-Smith, 2003a, 2003b; Hodgkinson et al., 2009b). Accordingly, in this chapter we restrict our focus to a range of alternative assessment techniques, ones that in a variety of ways usefully complement such self-report instruments. Our review of the literature does not claim to offer a comprehensive survey of the full range of potentially pertinent tools. Rather, our intention is to reflect upon the current state of scientific progress with regard to what we consider to be some of the principal methodological alternatives for seeking to capture the processes and outcomes of intuition. In particular, we consider the strengths and weaknesses of selected procedures that seek to capture in...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.