Describe what psychologists have discovered about intuitive thinking and its imperfections in consumer decision-making (thinking fast and thinking slow, choice blindness, advertising and false memory).

Mark scheme

Marking points from the official mark scheme (Oct/Nov 2020). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.

1. [2] Thinking Fast and Slow/System 1 and 2 (Shleifer, 2012): System 1 is fast, emotional, automatic, unconscious, effortless, for quick decisions on everyday products (e.g., milk).
2. [2] Thinking Fast and Slow/System 1 and 2 (Shleifer, 2012): System 2 is slow, calculating, conscious, controlled, effortful, and lazy, used for expensive items (e.g., car or house).
3. [2] Choice Blindness (Hall et al., 2010): In a supermarket study (180 customers), participants tasted jam/tea, rated preferences, and were then given the non-preferred item. Most did not detect the swap and accepted the alternative as their initial choice.
4. [2] Advertising and False Memory (Braun-LaTour et al., 2004): Study 1 showed more undergraduates remembered a false handshake (Bugs Bunny) as a true memory than those in a truthful condition (Mickey Mouse), indicating post-event false information influences memory. Study 2 found pictorial information led to more false memory recall than verbal or combined information.
5. [4] Named issue – Reliability: Hall et al.'s field experiment and Braun-LaTour et al.'s lab studies used highly standardised procedures, leading to high reliability. Consistent results and replicability are benefits of high reliability.
6. [2] Experimental method: Evaluating the strengths and limitations of using experimental designs (both field and lab) in this research.
7. [2] Sampling and generalisations: Discussing the representativeness of samples (e.g., supermarket customers, undergraduates) and the extent to which findings can be generalised.
8. [2] Other evaluative points: Usefulness/practical applications (e.g., for advertising), situational/individual explanations, use of questionnaires/self-reports, or ethical considerations (e.g., deception).