Published Work

book cover


De keersmaecker, J., Roets, A., Pennycook, G., Unkelbach, C., & Rand, D. G. Is the illusory truth effect robust to individual differences in cognitive ability, need for cognitive closure, and cognitive style? Available at SSRN
Feeney, J., Pennycook, G. & Van Boxtel, M. OpenMTurk: An Open-Source Administration Tool for Designing Robust MTurk Studies. Available at SSRN
Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. Crowdsourcing judgments of news source quality. Available at SSRN
Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. The implied truth effect: Attaching warnings to a subset of fake news stories increases perceived accuracy of stories without warnings. Available at SSRN
Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. Available at SSRN
Tappin, B. M., Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. Rethinking the link between cognitive sophistication and identity-protective bias in political belief formation. Available at PsyArXiv


*indicates equal contribution


Bronstein, M., Pennycook, G. Bear, A., Rand, D. G., & Cannon, T. (in press). Belief in Fake News is Associated with Delusionality, Dogmatism, Religious Fundamentalism, and Reduced Analytic Thinking. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. link preprint
Lazer*, D., Baum*, M., Benkler, J., Berinsky, A., Greenhill, K., Menczer, F., Metzger, M., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Sloman, S., Sunstein, C., Thorson, E., Watts, D., & Zittrain, J. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 9, 1094-1096. link
Pennycook, G., Cannon, T. D., & Rand, D. G. (2018). Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. link preprint
Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. (2018). Cognitive Reflection and the 2016 US Presidential Election. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. link preprint
Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. (2018). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition. link preprint
Pennycook, G. & Thompson, V. A. (2018). An analysis of the Canadian cognitive psychology job market (2006-2016). Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 71-80. link preprint
Stagnaro, M. N., Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2018) Performance on the Cognitive Reflection Test is stable across time. Judgment and Decision Making, 13, 260–267. link (pdf)
Thompson, V. A., Pennycook, G., Trippas, D. & Evans, J. St. B. T. (2018). Do smart people have better intuitions?  Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 945-961. link
Trippas*, D., Kellen*, D., Singmann*, H., Pennycook, G., Koehler, D. J., Fugelsang, J. A., & Dubé, C. (2018). Characterizing belief bias in syllogistic reasoning: A hierarchical-bayesian meta-analysis of ROC data. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. link preprint


Bialek*, M. & Pennycook*, G. (2017). The cognitive reflection test is robust to multiple exposures. Behavior Research Methods. link
Pennycook, G., Ross, R.M., Koehler, D.J. & Fugelsang, J.A. (2017). Dunning-Kruger effects in reasoning: Theoretical implications of the failure to recognize incompetence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. link


Pennycook, G., Ross, R.M., Koehler, D.J., & Fugelsang, J.A. (2016). Atheists and agnostics are more reflective than religious believers: Four empirical studies and a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 11, e0153039. link
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J.A., Koehler, D.J. & Fugelsang, J.A. (2016). Is the cognitive reflection test a measure of both reflection and intuition? Behavior Research Methods, 48, 341–348. link
Ross, R. M., Pennycook, G., McKay, R., Gervais, W. M., Langdon, R., & Coltheart, M. (2016). Analytic thinking style, not delusional ideation, predicts data gathering in a large beads task study. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 4, 300-314. link
Sterling, J. L., Jost, J. T., & Pennycook, G. (2016). Are neoliberals more susceptible to bullshit? Judgment and Decision Making, 11, 352–360. link (pdf)


Barr*, N., Pennycook*, G., Stolz, J.A., & Fugelsang, J.A. (2015). The brain in your pocket: Evidence that Smartphones are used to supplant thinking. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 473-480. link
Barr, N., Pennycook, G., Stolz, J.A., & Fugelsang, J.A. (2015). Reasoned connections: A dual-process perspective on creative thought. Thinking & Reasoning, 21, 61-75. [Special Issue on Creativity and Insight Problem Solving] link
Browne, M., Thomson, P., Rockloff, M., & Pennycook, G. (2015). Going against the herd: Understanding the psychosocial factors underlying the ‘vaccination confidence gap’. PLoS ONE, 10, e1032562. link
Meyer, A., Frederick, S., Burnham, T., Guevara Pinto, J. D., Boyer, T. W., Ball, L. J., Pennycook, G., Ackerman, R., & Thompson, V.A. (2015). Disfluent fonts don’t help people solve math problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, e16-e30. link
Medimorec*, S. & Pennycook*, G. (2015). The language of denial: Text analysis reveals differences in language use between climate change proponents and skeptics. Climatic Change, 1-9. [See also: Nature’s “Research Highlights” (Nature, 525, 292.) and the National Centre for Science Education] link
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J.A., Barr, N., Koehler, D.J. & Fugelsang, J.A. (2015) On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 10, 549-563. link (pdf)
Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J.A., & Koehler, D.J. (2015). What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cognitive Psychology, 80, 34-72. link
Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J.A., & Koehler, D.J. (2015). Everyday consequences of analytic thinking. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 425-43. [See also APS’ Observer] link
Trippas, D., Pennycook, G., Verde, M.F., & Handley, S.J. (2015). Better but still biased: Analytic cognitive style and belief bias. Thinking & Reasoning, 21, 431-445. link


Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J.A., Barr, N., Koehler, D.J. & Fugelsang, J.A. (2014). The role of analytic thinking in moral judgments and values. Thinking & Reasoning,20, 188-214. [Special Issue on Dual-Process Theories] link
Browne, M., Pennycook, G., Goodwin, B., & McHenry, M. (2014). Reflective minds and open hearts: Cognitive style and personality predict religiosity and spiritual thinking in a community sample. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 736-742. link
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J.A., Barr, N., Koehler, D.J. & Fugelsang, J.A. (2014). Cognitive style and religiosity: The role of conflict detection. Memory & Cognition, 42, 1-10. link
Pennycook*, G., Trippas*, D., Handley, S. J., & Thompson, V.A. (2014). Base-rates: Both neglected and intuitive. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 40, 544-554. link


Cheyne, J.A. & Pennycook, G. (2013). Sleep paralysis post-episode distress: Modeling potential effects of episode characteristics, general psychological distress, beliefs, and cognitive style. Clinical Psychological Science, 1, 135-148. link
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J.A., Koehler, D.J. & Fugelsang, J.A. (2013). Belief bias during reasoning among religious believers and skeptics. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 806-811. link
Thompson, V.A., Prowse Turner, J., Pennycook, G., Ball, L., Brack, H., Ophir, Y. & Ackerman, R. (2013). The role of answer fluency and perceptual fluency as metacognitive cues for initiating analytic thinking. Cognition, 128, 237-251. link


Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J.A., Seli, P., Koehler, D.J. & Fugelsang, J.A. (2012). Analytic cognitive style predicts religious and paranormal belief. Cognition, 213, 335-346. link
Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J.A. & Koehler, D.J. (2012). Are we good at detecting conflict during reasoning? Cognition, 124, 101-106. link
Pennycook, G. & Thompson, V.A. (2012). Reasoning with base-rates is routine, relatively effortless and context-dependent. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 528-534. link


Thompson, V.A., Prowse Turner, J. & Pennycook, G. (2011). Intuition, reason and metacognition. Cognitive Psychology, 63, 107-140. link


Pennycook, G., De Neys, W., Evans, J. St. B. T., Stanovich, K. E., & Thompson, V. A. (2018). The mythical dual-process typology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. [Commentary on Melnikoff & Bargh, 2018] link
Pennycook, G. (in press). You are not your data. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. [Commentary on Zwaan, Etz, Lucas, & Donnelan, in press] link
Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. (2017). The evolution of analytic thinking? Behavioral and Brain Sciences. [Commentary on Burkart, Schubiger, & van Schaik, 2017] link
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J.A., Barr, N., Koehler, D.J. & Fugelsang, J.A. (2016) It’s still bullshit: Reply to Dalton. Judgment and Decision Making, 11, 123-125. link
Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J.A., Koehler, D.J., & Thompson, V.A. (2016) Commentary on: Rethinking fast and slow based on a critique of reaction-time reverse inference. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1174. link
Pennycook, G. & Ross, R.M. (2016). Commentary on: Cognitive reflection vs. calculation in decision making. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 9. link
Pennycook, G. (2015). Domain generality in religious cognition. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 5, 247-250. [Commentary on Johnson, Li, & Cohen, 2015] link
Pennycook, G. (2014). Evidence that analytic cognitive style influences religious belief: Comment on Razmyar and Reeve (2014). Intelligence, 43, 21-26. link
Thompson, V.A., Ackerman, R., Sidi, Y., Ball, L., Pennycook, G., & Prowse Turner, J. (2013). The role of answer fluency and perceptual fluency in the monitoring and control of reasoning: Reply to Alter, Oppenheimer, & Epley (2013). Cognition, 128, 256-258. link


Pennycook, G. (2018). Why reason matters: An introduction. In G. Pennycook (Ed.). The New Reflectionism in Cognitive Psychology: Why Reason Matters. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Barr, N. & Pennycook, G. (2018). Why reason matters: Connecting research on human reason to the challenges of the anthropocene. In G. Pennycook (Ed.). The New Reflectionism in Cognitive Psychology: Why Reason Matters. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Pennycook, G. (2017). A perspective on the theoretical foundation of dual-process models. In W. De Neys (Ed.). Dual-Process 2.0. New York, NY: Psychology Press. PDF
Pennycook, G., Tranel, D., Warner, K., & Asp, E. W. (2017). Beyond reasonable doubt: Cognitive and neuropsychological implications for religious disbelief. In A. Coles (Ed.). Neurology of Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. PDF
Pennycook, G. & Thompson, V.A. (2016). Base-rate neglect. In R. Pohl (Ed.). Cognitive Illusions: Intriguing Phenomena in Thinking, Judgment, and Memory (2nd ed.). Hove, UK: Psychology Press. PDF


Barr, N. & Pennycook, G. (2018). The most dangerous and misunderstood threat to humanity is the human mind. QuartzLink [Note: We did not choose this title.]
Cheyne, J.A. & Pennycook, G. (2016). The seductions of pretentious bullshit: An empirical study. Skeptic Magazine, 21, 40-45. PDF
Pennycook, G. (2016). Why bullshit is no laughing matter. Aeon Digital Magazine. Link