Gord Pennycook
Special guest
Associate Professor, Dorothy and Ariz Mehta Faculty Leadership Fellow
My research focus is on reasoning and decision-making, broadly defined. I investigate the distinction between intuitive processes (“gut feelings”) and more deliberative (“analytic”) reasoning processes and am principally interested in the causes (a) and consequences (b) of analytic thinking. That is, what makes us think and why is it (thinking) important? This is critical to understand if we’re ever to find better ways to make decisions. Alas, a lot of our problems as a species come from errors that we make during reasoning and decision-making – from global warming to health issues (including, but not limited to, the spread of pandemics) to political polarization and misinformation – and, thus, understanding why people make these errors is a major focus of mine. A recent review of my theoretical perspective and much of my research can be found here.
Gord Pennycook has been a guest on 2 episodes.
-
70: Special Series Episode 2: Metacognition and Judgment
October 5th, 2026 | 39 mins 10 secs
barry schwartz, cristine legare, dan mcadams, dilip jeste, emotions, eranda jayawickreme, exemplars, gord pennycook, happiness, interventions, judgment, judith glück, justin brienza, kristján kristjánsson, laurie paul, meaning, measuring wisdom, metacognition, monika ardelt, narratives, philosophy, psychology, purpose, reasoning, social science, steve fleming, thomas costello, training ethan kross, well being, wisdom
Welcome to a five-episode special series built around the first Annual Review of Psychology chapter on wisdom since 2011.
Episode 2: Metacognition and Judgment (with Gord Pennycook, Steve Fleming, and Thomas Costello)
Is thinking harder always the key to making better decisions, or can it sometimes make things worse? Gord Pennycook, Steve Fleming, and Thomas Costello join Igor and Charles to explore what happens when we start thinking about our own thinking. Gord reveals why intelligence and rationality aren't the same thing, and why simply thinking more isn't necessarily the answer, Steve takes us inside the machinery that helps us monitor and regulate our decisions, and Thomas explores what intellectual humility is, how we might recognize it, and why being confident about our own competence can be so misleading. Along the way, Igor and Charles uncover a three-part cycle at the heart of wise judgment: seeking input, resolving conflicts, and monitoring what happens next. So what does it take to become better at knowing what we know, and what we don't?
-
Episode 15: Wisdom, Bullshit & Beliefs (with Gordon Pennycook)
April 7th, 2019 | 45 mins 7 secs
climate change, cognitive reflection test, dual process theory, fake news, misinformation, motivated reasoning, psuedo-profound bullshit, psychology, social psychology, wisdom, wisdom of chopra
‘Wholeness quiets infinite phenomena?’ Does it, really?! Why do some people fall for pseudo-profound bullshit and others don’t? When we share fake news stories, is this because we're motivated to think they're real, or because we don't bother to think at all? And why do scientists fight tooth-and-nail over the mechanisms involved, such as “System I vs. System II”, “Fast vs. Slow” and other frameworks? Gordon Pennycook joins Igor and Charles to discuss the critical distinction between a liar and a bullshitter, the cognitive reflection test, the random Deepak Chopra quote generator, the Ig Nobel prize, motivated reasoning, climate change beliefs, academic turf wars among dual process theorists, and how to stop yourself from compulsively retweeting fake news. Igor suggests that Gord only thought of studying bullshit after disbelief at one of Igor’s early talks, Gord reminds us that even the most enlightened social media platforms are in no hurry to help people STOP sharing news, and Charles unexpectedly finds common ground with the Chinese government. Welcome to Episode 15.