The public's probabilistic numeracy: How tasks, education and exposure to games of chance shape it

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 457-470

  Hertwig, Ralph ^a   Zangerl, Monika Andrea ^a   Biedert, Esther ^a   Margraf, Jürgen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Cognitive illusions; Education; Probabilistic reasoning; Representative sample

Indexed keywords

EID: 55549102994     PISSN: 08943257     EISSN: 10990771     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bdm.611     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Adler, J. E. (1984). Abstraction is uncooperative. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 14, 165-181.
2. Adler, J. E. (1991). An optimist's pessimism: Conversation and conjunction. Posnan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and Humanities, 21, 251-282.
3. Birnbaum, M. H. (1983). Base rates in Bayesian inference: Signal detection analysis of the cab problem. American Journal of Psychology, 96, 85-94.
4. Black,W. C., Nease, R. F., & Tosteson, A. (1995). Perception of risk and screening effectiveness in women younger than 50 years of age. Journal the National Cancer Institute, 87, 720-731.
5. Bondolfi, G., Osiek, C., & Ferrero, F. (2000). Prevalence estimates of pathological gambling in Switzerland. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 101, 473-475.
6. Chase, V. M., Hertwig, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (1998). Visions of rationality. Trends in Cognitive Science, 2, 206-214.
7. Dhami, M., Hertwig, R., & Hoffrage, U. (2004). The role of representative design in an ecological approach to cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 959-988.
8. Eddy, D.M. (1982). Probabilistic reasoning in clinical medicine: Problems and opportunities. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 249-267). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9. Evans, J. St B. T., & Dusoir, A. E. (1977). Proportionality and sample size as factors in intuitive statistical judgement. Acta Psychologica, 41, 129-137.
10. Fagerlin, A., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Ubel, P. A., Jankovic, A., Derry, H. A., & Smith, D. M. (2007). Measuring numeracy without a math test: Development of the subjective numeracy scale. Medical Decision Making, 27, 672-680.
11. Freedman, D., Pisani, R., Purves, R., & Adhikari, A. (1991). Statistics (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
12. Gigerenzer, G. (1996). On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to Kahneman and Tversky. Psychological Review, 103, 592-596.
13. Gigerenzer, G. (2001). Content-blind norms, no norms, or good norms? A reply to Vranas. Cognition, 81, 93-103.
14. Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Calculated risks: How to know when numbers deceive you. New York: Simon & Schuster.
15. Gigerenzer, G., Hertwig, R., van den Broek, E., Fasolo, B., & Katsikopoulos, K. (2005). "A 30% chance of rain tomorrow": How does the public understand probabilistic weather forecasts? Risk Analysis, 25, 623-629.
16. Gigerenzer, G., Swijtink, Z., Porter, T., Daston, L., Beatty, J., & Krüger, L. (1989). The empire of chance: How probability changed science and everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17. Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (2002). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. Gould, S. J. (1992). Bully for brontosaurus: Reflections in natural history. New York: Norton.
19. Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, C. R., Hyde, J. S., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8, 1-51.
20. Henrich, J. (2001). Challenges for everyone: Real people, deception, one-shot games, social learning, and computers. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 414-415.
21. Hertwig, R., Benz, B., & Krauss, S. (2008). The conjunction fallacy and the meanings of ''and''. Manuscript submitted for publication.
22. Hertwig, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (1999). The conjunction fallacy revisited: How intelligent inferences look like reasoning errors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 275-305.
23. Hertwig, R., Pachur, T., & Kurzenhäuser, S. (2005). Judgments of risk frequencies: Tests of possible cognitive mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 35, 621-642.
24. Hilton, D. J. (1995). The social context of reasoning: Conversational inference and rational judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 248-271.
25. Huff, D. (1954/1993). How to lie with statistics. New York: Norton.
26. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.), (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1996). On the reality of cognitive illusions. Psychological Review, 103, 582-591.
28. Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1993). Revising the South Oaks Gambling Screen in different settings. Journal of Gambling Studies, 9, 213-223.
29. Lipkus, I. M., Samsa, G., & Rimer, B. K. (2001). General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated sample. Medical Decision Making, 21, 37-44.
30. Macdonald, R. R. (1986). Credible conceptions and implausible probabilities. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 39, 15-27.
31. Mellers, B., Hertwig, R., & Kahneman, D. (2001). Do frequency representations eliminate conjunction effects? Psychological Science, 12, 269-275.
32. Murphy, A. H., & Winkler, R. L. (1984). Probability forecasting in meteorology. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 489-500.
33. Paulos, J. A. (2001). Innumeracy: Mathematical illiteracy and its consequences. New York: Hill and Wang.
34. Peters, E., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Mazzocco, K., & Dickert, S. (2006). Numeracy and decision making. Psychological Science, 17, 407-413.
35. Peterson, C. R., & Beach, L. R. (1967). Man as an intuitive statistician. Psychological Bulletin, 68, 29-46.
36. Politzer, G., & Noveck, I. A. (1991). Are conjunction rule violations the result of conversational rule violations? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 20, 83-103.
37. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.
38. Schwartz, L. M., Woloshin, S., Black, W., & Welch, G. (1997). The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Annals of Internal Medicine, 127, 966-972.
39. Sedlmeier, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (1997). Intuitions about sample size: The empirical law of large numbers. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10, 33-51.
40. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1976). Cognitive processes and societal risk taking In J. S. Carroll, & J. W. Payne (Eds.), Cognition and Social Behavior. (pp. 165-184). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in framing and conjunction effects. Thinking and Reasoning, 4, 289-317.
42. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645-726.
43. Tentori, K., Bonini, N., & Osherson, D. (2004). The conjunction fallacy: A misunderstanding about conjunction? Cognitive Science, 28, 467-477.
44. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
45. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90, 293-315.
46. Vranas, P. M. (2000). Gigerenzer's normative critique of Kahneman and Tversky. Cognition, 76, 179-193.
47. Zangerl, M. A., Munsch, S., Meyer, A. H., & Margraf, J. (2008). Prevalence and risk of pathological gambling in Switzerland after the legalization of games of chance and casinos in 2000. Manuscript submitted for publication.
48. Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Smith, D. M., Ubel, P. A., & Fagerlin, A. (2007). Validation of the subjective numeracy scale: Effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Medical Decision Making, 27, 663-671.