Examined individual differences in intrinsic motivation to engage in effortful cognitive endeavors in 2 experiments involving 293 undergraduates. Results of Exp I indicate that Ss high in need for cognition were more likely to think about and elaborate cognitively on issue-relevant information when forming attitudes than were Ss low in need for cognition. Analyses further indicated that Ss low in need for cognition acted as cognitive misers rather than as verbal dolts. In Exp II, individual differences in need for cognition were used to test the prediction from the elaboration likelihood model that Ss who tend to engage in extensive issue-relevant thinking when formulating their position on an issue tend to exhibit stronger attitude–behavior correspondence. Results confirm this hypothesis: The attitudes of Ss high in need for cognition, which were obtained in a survey completed approximately 8 wks before the 1984 presidential election, were more predictive of behavioral intentions and reported voting behavior than were the attitudes of Ss low in need for cognition. (49 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)