Emerging research in empirical economics posits a question on the relation between underlying risk preferences and reflective cognitive ability. In an experimental setting, a preliminary sample of 260 participants undergo a series of incentivized choice experiments to elicit risk preferences and a Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) to obtain estimates of their reflective ability. We sidestep potential biases by using a Fechner error specification along with a contextualized version of the utility function. Individuals who are more likely to avoid risky outcomes have significantly lower scores on the CRT. The analysis validates a prominent relationship spanning the economics and psychology literature and suggests a potential direction of causal inference for future research.