In a groundbreaking international study challenging prevailing assumptions about cultural decision-making styles, researchers from the University of Waterloo have revealed that individuals across diverse societies predominantly rely on self-reflection when faced with complex decisions. The comprehensive survey, encompassing over 3,500 participants from a wide spectrum of environments—from bustling megacities to remote Indigenous communities deeply rooted in the Amazon rainforest—provides unprecedented insight into the cognitive processes underpinning decision-making worldwide. This study marks the broadest cross-cultural examination to date of how people weigh intuition, deliberation, and social input in their choices.
Conventional wisdom has long held that Western cultures value autonomy and internal reflection when making decisions, whereas more collectivist societies tend to depend heavily on advice from friends, family, or community consensus. However, the data from this extensive survey robustly overturns such simplistic dichotomies. Researchers found that, regardless of cultural background or societal norms emphasizing independence or interdependence, most individuals start by looking inward—engaging their own intuition and deliberative faculties—before considering external advice. This finding disrupts entrenched narratives and suggests a universal cognitive pattern that transcends cultural boundaries.
Dr. Igor Grossmann, the lead author and a psychology professor at Waterloo, emphasizes the practical implications of recognizing this widespread inclination toward individual reflection. He notes that people often disregard valuable external counsel, whether related to health, finance, or personal life decisions, despite empirical evidence indicating that such advice can improve outcomes. Understanding this intrinsic self-reliance can reshape how organizations approach collaboration and teamwork, advocating for methods that respect individuals’ need for private contemplation prior to group discussions or advice-sharing. This nuanced approach could enhance receptivity to external viewpoints by aligning with innate cognitive tendencies.
This study’s findings deepen our understanding of the intricate interplay between cultural influence and internal cognitive mechanisms. While the degree of preference for self-reliant decision-making varied in relation to a culture’s emphasis on independence versus interdependence, such variations acted more like a “volume knob” modulating the intensity of this inner voice rather than a binary switch dictating whether or not someone seeks input from others at all. Cultures valuing independence amplify this introspective process, whereas interdependent cultures soften it, promoting somewhat greater openness to social consultation without replacing internal reasoning altogether.
The methodology underpinning this research involved a large-scale, cross-cultural survey design that gathered qualitative and quantitative data on participants’ decision-making preferences. Subjects were queried on the relative weight they assign to intuition, analytical deliberation, advice from trusted friends, and collective crowd input when confronted with complex choices. Analysis of this robust data set allowed researchers to track patterns, compare preferences across societies, and account for cultural variables that shape cognitive style without presuming simplistic cultural stereotypes.
What emerges from these findings is a paradigm shift in how psychologists and social scientists conceptualize decision-making as a dynamic cognitive process situated within, but not dictated by, cultural context. This approach acknowledges the universal human tendency to first engage inner thought processes—both fast, intuitive judgments and slower, reflective reasoning—before considering externally generated information. Consequently, decision-making is better framed as a multi-stage cognitive choreography rather than an either-or cultural attribute.
The implications for cross-cultural communication and global collaboration are profound. Acknowledging that internal deliberation is the default mode for most people can help mitigate misunderstandings in international teamwork, diplomacy, and multicultural environments where assumptions about decision styles often lead to friction. When project leaders and negotiators recognize and accommodate colleagues’ preference to privately process decisions before engaging with others, they may cultivate more effective and respectful exchanges that honor foundational cognitive habits.
Further extending the impact of this research, the study highlights the importance of structuring collaborative decision-making processes in ways that incorporate private reflection phases. By encouraging individuals to first reason through problems independently, organizations can prevent premature dismissal of alternative viewpoints and reduce defensiveness toward counsel. This can empower teams to harness the combined strengths of intuition, deliberation, and social input in a sequence that aligns organically with cognitive tendencies.
Notably, the universality observed in self-reliant decision-making also resonates with theories of dual-process cognition, which differentiate between fast, automatic intuitive thinking (System 1) and slower, more analytical deliberation (System 2). The survey suggests that the interplay of these processes within individuals is consistent globally, underscoring that culture fine-tunes, but does not fundamentally alter, the cognitive architecture driving decisions.
The study was conducted under the auspices of the Geography of Philosophy Project, a broad initiative spearheaded by Dr. Edouard Machery of the University of Pittsburgh. This interdisciplinary endeavor strives to map philosophical concepts onto cultural and geographical landscapes, bridging cognitive science and anthropology. The collaborative effort that produced this research involved nearly 40 authors worldwide, reflecting the study’s vast scope and integrative academic approach.
Published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, this article offers a compelling challenge to stereotypes about decision-making behaviors and calls for a reevaluation of how culture interacts with human cognition. By illuminating the shared psychological foundation beneath cultural variation, this work propels the conversation forward about human nature and fosters a more nuanced appreciation of cognitive diversity.
As global societies become increasingly interconnected, such insights are invaluable. Recognizing that people everywhere instinctively “go it alone” before seeking external input can inform policy-making, education, mental health interventions, and organizational management. When systems flexibly accommodate this universal tendency, they can nurture wiser, more inclusive, and ultimately more effective decision-making on individual, communal, and institutional levels.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Decision-making preferences for intuition, deliberation, friends or crowds in independent and interdependent societies
News Publication Date: 12-Aug-2025
Web References:
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2025.1355
https://www.geographyofphilosophy.com/
References:
Grossmann, I., et al. (2025). Decision-making preferences for intuition, deliberation, friends or crowds in independent and interdependent societies. Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2025.1355
Keywords:
Social sciences, Behavioral psychology, Decision making, Human thought, Problem solving, Social cognition, Population studies, Thought processes
