Reasoning

How Reasoning Affects Function

The variances in the ways users think things through is another opportunity for product designers to hone in on user challenges and needs with regards to their product.

Flexibility of thought	Users with high adaptivity are problem solvers who embrace change, and modify their thinking and beliefs in response to new information or circumstances. In a digital product environment, they can easily adjust their approach as their circumstances and the online content or experience change or evolve. They can figure things out independently when immediate support is unavailable. Users who are more rigid may resist changes or new ideas. They may have a real hard time and need extra support when your app undergoes an updatedor when the structure of their own routine, environment, or belief system is challenged.
Emotional rational balance	Basically, the emotional rational balance comes down to emotional intelligence. Some users who tend toward emotional thinking, relying on their feelings and intuition to make decisions, may struggle with objectivity and considering alternative perspectives. Others may tend toward rational thinking to the extent that their focus on critical, evidence-based logic ignores the benefits of emotion to the human experience and social connection and collaboration. Incorporating emotional intelligence supercharges social interactions by bringing balance to the range between emotion and rational thinking, and it also can improve a user’s general flexibility with platform issues or updates.
Balanced decisiveness	Indecisive users delay their decision-making. They may especially struggle when presented with a wide array of options and resources, spending excessive time browsing all the possibilities or simply avoiding deciding altogether. Users who are indecisive may also experience a lack of self-advocacy and isolation from peers and support networks. Conversely, decision-making that is too accelerated may result in errors. The key is thoughtful balance.
Risk inclination	Risk-comfortable users feel no real apprehension for potential failure. They eagerly venture outside their comfort zones, recognizing risks as opportunities for growth. While general anxiety usually inspires caution, achievement anxiety threat can actually increase abrupt risk-taking.
Engagement consistency	Highly reliable user maintain a perception of engagement consistency in their actions. They follow through on their commitments and meet their deadlines. Some users however may appear to act impulsively on immediate desires. They may exhibit inconsistency or unpredictability in their behavior, resulting in missed commitments and deadlines. It’s important to note that this impulsive behavior is less likely to be due to inherent character traits and is instead due to situational or circumstantial factors that guide this behavior.

Research

[103]  Michael P Lillis. Faculty emotional intelligence and student-faculty interactions: Implications for student retention. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 13(2):155–178, 2011.

[106]  Senne Braem and Tobias Egner. Getting a grip on cognitive flexibility. Current directions in psychological science, 27(6):470–476, 2018.

[107]  Marina Fiori, Shagini Udayar, and Ashley Vesely Maillefer. Emotion information processing as a new component of emotional intelligence: Theoretical framework and empirical evidence. European Journal of Personality, 36(2):245–264, 2022.

[108]  María José Gutiérrez-Cobo, Rosario Cabello, and Pablo Fernández-Berrocal. The relationship between emotional intelligence and cool and hot cognitive processes: a systematic review. Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 10:101, 2016.

[109]  Andrea L Patalano and Steven M Wengrovitz. Indecisiveness and response to risk in deciding when to decide. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20(4):405–424, 2007.

[110]  William J Wellington, David B Hutchinson, and Anthony J Faria. Measuring the impact of a marketing simulation game: Experience on perceived indecisiveness. Simulation & Gaming, 48(1):56–80, 2017.

[111]  Angela L Duckworth and Martin EP Seligman. Self-discipline outdoes iq in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological science, 16(12):939–944, 2005.

[112]  Vivek K Singh, Rushil Goyal, and Shenghao Wu. Riskalyzer: Inferring individual risk-taking propensity using phone metadata. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 2(1):1–21, 2018.

[113]  Josh Leota, Kyle Nash, and Ian McGregor. Reactive risk-taking: anxiety regulation via approach motivation increases risk-taking behavior. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 49(1):81–96, 2023.

[114]  Jianing Zhou and Suma Bhat. Modeling consistency using engagement patterns in online courses. In LAK21: 11th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, pages 226–236, 2021.