You know, when I look back at my life, I made choices. But I did not experience them as decisions in the way that you know of. I have very little to say describing myself as making decisions, in part because I have pretty strong intuitions and I follow them.

– Daniel Kahneman

It’s easy to overthink decisions. Maybe you’re trying to find the perfect solution, or you’re worried about regretting your choice. But what if the answer was to invest less attention in deliberate thought and listen to your intuition? In an interview with Adam Grant, Kahneman highlights how he still relies on his intuitions despite being an expert on errors in intuition.

Two systems of thought

Kahneman, alongside Amos Tversky, revolutionized our understanding of how people form judgements and make decisions. In 1974, they started publishing findings on systematic and predictable errors we make. They identified three core heuristics, or rules of thumb:

1. Availability, where you think the probability of an event occurring is higher because it is more easily comes to mind. Like what you heard on the news recently.

• Representativeness, where you judge whether something belongs to one category or another without properly accounting for what happens in reality. Like past odds and stereotypes.

• Anchoring, where you rely too much on the first piece of information provided.

Those heuristics, to use the concepts from Daniel’s 2011 book Thinking, Fast and Slow, are associated with errors in System 1 thinking. This system is fast and includes “both variants of intuitive thought – the expert and the heuristic – as well as the entirely automatic mental activities of perception and memory”.

To guard against those errors, we use our System 2 thinking, which is slower and more deliberate to prevent “many foolish thoughts and inappropriate impulses from overt expression.”

Origin of what we do right

If System 1 predictably makes errors, shouldn’t we err towards deliberate thinking? While System 2 has benefits, it requires attention and can still leads to errors

System 2 is not a paragon of rationality. Its abilities are limited and so is the knowledge to which it has access. We do not always think straight when we reason, and the errors are not always due to intrusive and incorrect intuitions. Often, we make mistakes because we (System 2) do not know any better...

System 1 is indeed the origin of much of what we do wrong, but it is also the origin of most of what we do right – which is most of what we do. Our thoughts and actions are routinely guided by System 1 and generally are on the mark.

Making the decision right requires balance. System 2 can help, but most of our thought is guided by System 1. And a lot of it comes down to memory

One of the marvels [of system 1] is the rich and detailed model of our world that is maintained in associative memory… Memory also holds the vast repertory of skills we have acquired in a lifetime of practice, which automatically produce adequate solutions to challenges as they arise… The acquisition of skills requires a regular environment, an adequate opportunity to practice, and rapid and unequivocal feedback about the correctness of thoughts and actions. When these conditions are fulfilled, skill eventually develops, and the intuitive judgements and choices that quickly come to mind will mostly be accurate… A marker of skilled performance is the ability to deal with vast amounts of information swiftly and efficiently.

Herbet Simon describes intuition in a similar way

The situation has provided a cue; this cue has given the expert access to information stored in memory, and the information provides the answer. Intuition is nothing more and nothing less than recognition.

Listen but be aware

We can better use our intuition to make decisions by improving our repertory of skills and trying to “block errors”. The first can be done using deliberate practice, but the second one is harder than it sounds.

We would all like to have a warning bell that rings loudly whenever we are about to make a serious error, but no such bell is available, and cognitive illusions are generally more difficult to recognise than perceptual illusions. The voice of reasons may be much fainter than the loud and clear voice of an erroreous intuition, and questioning your intuitions is unpleasant when you face the stress of a big decision. More doubt is the last thing you want when you are in trouble.

To block these errors, Daniel offers two suggestions. First, imagine what someone you respect would say

Decision makers are sometimes able to better imagine the voices of present gossipers and future critics than to hear the hesitant voice of their own doubts. They will make better choices when they trust their critics to be sophisticated and fair, and when they expect their decision to be judged by how it was made, not only how it turned out.

Second, delay your intuition and “sleep on it”. Consider the example of an interview

When you have formed an intuition, you are no longer taking in information. You are just, rationalizing your own decision, or you’re confirming your own decision. And there’s a lot of research indicating that this is actually what happens in interviews. That interviewers spent a lot of time, they make their mind up very quickly and they spend the rest of the interview confirming what they believe, which is really a waste of time.

Making the decision right doesn’t always mean investing more attention. It means using effortful thinking when appropriate. Use your intuition but acknowledge that it can be wrong and that it’s difficult to tell when you’re wrong. Try delaying your intuition and imagining what a fair and sophisticated critic might say. But then let go and acknowledge you might not make the right decision. That’s okay.