System 1 or System 2? Calibrating Your Purchase-Classification Judgment
Objective: Classify 6 real purchase scenarios as System 1-dominant or System 2-dominant, then check your reasoning against a known-good key to calibrate your judgment before applying it to your own marketing decisions.
You're a lifecycle marketer at Chewy, the Nasdaq-listed pet products retailer known for its Autoship subscription model, prepping a briefing on which purchase moments deserve emotional creative versus which need a spec sheet.
Read each scenario, classify it, write one sentence of reasoning, then reveal the known-good key and score yourself.
Before you start
What you'll need
Free path (everything below is enough to finish)
Free and forces written reasoning, which is what actually calibrates judgment
The process
1 step
Step 01 of 01
The lesson's rule of thumb: cheap and habitual purchases run on System 1, expensive and considered purchases wake System 2. A $4 snack needs imagery and one-tap checkout, a $40,000 contract needs ROI proof.
For each of the 6 scenarios below, is the dominant decision-maker System 1 or System 2, and what single word gives it away, price, risk, habit, or novelty?
Procedure
- Read all 6 scenarios below before classifying any of them
- For each, write S1 or S2 plus one sentence of reasoning in your own words
- Do not look at the outputSample answer key until you have classified all 6
- Score yourself: 5-6 correct is well-calibrated, 3-4 means re-read the price/risk/habit rule, 0-2 means re-read How It Actually Works before trusting your gut on real campaigns
SCENARIOS 1. Reordering the same bag of dog treats via Autoship (habitual, $18) 2. Switching pet insurance providers for the first time ($40/month, 1-year lock-in) 3. Adding a $6 squeaky toy to cart because it's cute in the thumbnail 4. Choosing a $1,200 orthopedic dog bed after a vet recommendation 5. Clicking 'reorder' on a treat bag from a push notification while walking the dog 6. Comparing 3 pet insurance plans in a spreadsheet before signing up KNOWN-GOOD KEY 1. S1, habitual + low price, no new decision being made 2. S2, high risk (1-year lock-in) and unfamiliar category, needs comparison 3. S1, low price + emotional trigger (cute image), impulse 4. S2, high price + external authority signal (vet) invites deliberation 5. S1, near-zero friction, habitual, mobile context reinforces speed 6. S2, the act of comparing in a spreadsheet is System 2's signature move
Healthy
You correctly classify at least 5 of 6, and your reasoning names price, risk, habit, or novelty rather than a vague 'it felt like System 1'.
Unhealthy
You classify every scenario as System 1 (or every scenario as System 2) instead of splitting them, a sign you're not actually applying the price/risk gradient.
What this means
Miscalibration usually clusters around mid-price items, scenario 3's $6 toy or a $150 item, where the temptation is to overthink an impulse buy or under-think a considered one.
So what do I do about it?
| Symptom | Action | Effort |
|---|---|---|
| You scored 3 or below | Re-read How It Actually Works, then reclassify only the scenarios you got wrong | 5 min |
Final deliverable
A 6-row self-scored classification sheet with your reasoning and a calibration score out of 6.
See a reference example
HelloFresh purchase-classification calibration 1. First-time meal-kit subscription signup S2 new category, needs proof of value 2. Reordering the same weekly box S1 habitual, already trusts the brand 3. Upgrading to a premium recipe tier for $8 more S1 small delta, low-risk add-on 4. Cancelling after comparing 3 competitor prices S2 active comparison, price-driven Score: 4/4
Success criteria
You're done when you can:
- Classifies at least 5 of 6 scenarios correctly against the known-good key
- States the price, risk, habit, or novelty signal that drove each classification