Does having to justify one's judgments change the nature of the judgment process?

The effects of justification on subjects' application of judgment policies in a multiple-cue probability learning task under conditions of high versus low task predictability and provision versus no provision of feedback were investigated. The results showed that having to justify one's judgments will lead to higher consistency in the judgment policy when task predictability is low and no feedback is provided. The results are interpreted as indicating that justification may lead to an analytical mode of functioning in judgment behavior. Implications for research in cognitive conflict are also discussed.