Is guilt 'likely' or 'not certain'?. Contrast with previous probabilities determines choice of verbal terms.

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 135, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 267-277

  Juanchich, Marie ^a   Teigen, Karl Halvor ^b   Villejoubert, Gaëlle ^c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^c KINGSTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Communication; Directionality; Judgments of guilt; Legal context; Uncertainty; Upward and downward comparisons; Verbal probabilities

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; GUILT; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MALE; PROBABILITY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; UNCERTAINTY;

ADULT; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COMMUNICATION; FEMALE; GUILT; HUMANS; MALE; PROBABILITY; QUESTIONNAIRES; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 77958153809     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.016     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Beyth-Marom R. How probable is probable? A numerical translation of verbal probability expressions. Journal of Forecasting 1982, 1:257-269. 10.1002/for.3980010305.
2. Bonnefon J.F., Villejoubert G. Tactful, or doubtful? Expectations of politeness explain the severity bias in the interpretation of probability phrases. Psychological Science 2006, 17:747-751. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01776.x.
3. Brun W., Teigen K.H. Verbal probabilities: Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both?. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1988, 41:390-404. 10.1016/0749-5978(88)90036-2.
4. Budescu D.V., Broomell S.B., Por H.H. Improving communication of uncertainty in the IPCC reports. Psychological Science 2009, 20:299-308. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02284.x.
5. Budescu D.V., Karelitz T.M., Wallsten T.S. Predicting the directionality of probability words from their membership functions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2003, 16:159-180. 10.1002/bdm.440.
6. Budescu D.V., Wallsten T.S. Processing linguistic probabilities: General principles and empirical evidence. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation 1995, 32:275-318.
7. Budescu D.V., Weinberg S., Wallsten T.S. Decisions based on numerically and verbally expressed uncertainties. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1988, 14:281-294. 10.1037/0096-1523.14.2.281.
8. Clark H.H., Clark E.V. The psychology of language: An introduction to psycholinguistics 1977, Harcourt, Brace, New York.
9. Collins S., Alison L. How certain are offender profilers about the claims they make?. Internal report for the National Crime and Operations Faculty. Hook, Bramshill, UK 2002.
10. Diez F.J., Druzdzel M.J. Verbal expressions of probability. Encyclopedia of Medical Decision Making 2009, 904-907. Sage Publications, Los Angeles. M.W. Kattan (Ed.).
11. Erev I., Cohen B.L. Verbal versus numerical probabilities: Efficiency, biases and the preference paradox. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1990, 45:1-18. 10.1016/0749-5978(90)90002-Q.
12. Fischhoff B., Beyth-Marom R. Hypothesis evaluation from a Bayesian perspective. Psychological Review 1983, 90:239-260. 10.1037/0033-295X.90.3.239.
13. Gigerenzer G., Hoffrage U. How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review 1995, 102:684-704.
14. Gilbert D.T. How mental systems believe. The American Psychologist 1991, 46:107-119.
15. Grice H.P. Logic and conversation. Studies in the way of words 1989, 22-40. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. H.P. Grice (Ed.).
16. Halberg A.M., Teigen K.H. Framing of imprecise quantities: When are lower interval bounds preferred to upper bounds?. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2009, 22:490-509. 10.1002/bdm.635.
17. Hilton D.J. Emotional tone and argumentation in risk communication. Judgment and Decision Making 2008, 3:100-110.
18. Honda H., Yamagishi K. Directional verbal probabilities: Inconsistencies between preferential judgments and numerical meanings. Experimental Psychology 2006, 53:161-170. 10.1027/1618-3169.53.3.161.
19. Horn L.R. A natural history of negation 1989, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
20. Hsee C.K. The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1996, 67:247-257. 10.1006/obhd.1996.0077.
21. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Summary for policymakers: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007, Retrieved from http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf.
22. Juanchich, M., Villejoubert, G., & Mullet, E. (2008, May). What does directionality mean? Paper presented at the European Group for Process Tracing Studies Conference, Bergen, Norway.
23. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Variants of uncertainty. Cognition 1982, 11:143-157.
24. Karelitz T.M., Budescu D.V. You say probable and I say likely: Improving inter-personal communication with verbal probability phrases. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied 2004, 10:25-41.
25. Levinson S.C. Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature 2000, MITPress, Cambridge, Mass.
26. Mandel D.R. Violations of coherence in subjective probability: A representational and assessment processes account. Cognition 2008, 106:130-156. 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.01.001.
27. McGuire W.J., McGuire C.V. Cognitive-versus-affective positivity asymmetries in thought systems. European Journal of Social Psychology 1992, 22:571-591. 10.1002/ejsp. 2420220605.
28. McKenzie C.R., Nelson J.D. What a speaker's choice of frame reveals: Reference points, frame selection, and framing effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2003, 10:596-602.
29. McNeil B.J., Pauker S.G., Sox H.C., Tversky A. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. The New England Journal of Medicine 1982, 306:1259-1261.
30. Moxey L.M. Effects of what is expected on the focusing properties of quantifiers: A test of the presupposition-denial account. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 55:422-439. 10.1016/j.jml.2006.05.006.
31. Moxey L.M., Sanford A.J. Quantifiers and focus. Journal of Semantics 1987, 5:189-206. 10.1093/jos/5.3.189.
32. Moxey L.M., Sanford A.J. Prior expectation and the interpretation of natural language quantifiers. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 1993, 5:73-91. 10.1080/09541449308406515.
33. Moxey L.M., Sanford A.J. Communicating quantities: A review of psycholinguistic evidence of how expressions determine perspectives. Applied Cognitive Psychology 2000, 14:237-255.
34. Moxey L.M., Sanford A.J., Dawydiak E.J. Denials as controllers of negative quantifier focus. Journal of Memory and Language 2001, 44:427-442. 10.1006/jmla.2000.2736.
35. Peeters G. The positive-negative asymmetry: On cognitive consistency and positivity bias. European Journal of Social Psychology 1971, 1:455-474.
36. Piercey M.D. Motivated reasoning and verbal vs. numerical probability assessment: Evidence from an accounting context. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2009, 108:330-341.
37. Phillips L.D., Edwards W. Conservatism in a simple probability inference task. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1966, 72:346-354.
38. Rapoport A., Wallsten T.S., Erev I., Cohen B.L. Revision of opinion with verbally and numerically expressed uncertainties. Acta Psychologica 1990, 74:61-79.
39. Schwarz N., Hippler H.-J. Subsequent questions may influence answers to preceding questions in mail surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly 1995, 59:93-97.
40. Sperber D., Wilson D. Relevance: Communication and cognition 1995, Blackwell, Oxford.
41. Teigen K.H. When are low-probability events judged to be probable? Effects of outcome-set characteristics on verbal probability estimates. Acta Psychologica 1988, 67:157-174. 10.1016/0001-6918(88)90011-X.
42. Teigen K.H. The language of uncertainty. Acta Psychologica 1988, 68:27-38. 10.1016/0001-6918(88)90043-1.
43. Teigen K.H. More than X is a lot: Pragmatic implicatures of one-sided intervals. Social Cognition 2008, 26:379-400. 10.1521/soco.2008.26.4.379.
44. Teigen K.H., Brun W. Yes, but it is uncertain: Direction and communicative intention of verbal probabilistic terms. Acta Psychologica 1995, 88:233-258. 10.1016/0001-6918(93)E0071-9.
45. Teigen K.H., Brun W. The directionality of verbal probability expressions: Effects on decisions, predictions, and probabilistic reasoning. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1999, 80:155-190. 10.1006/obhd.1999.2857.
46. Teigen K.H., Brun W. Verbal expressions of probability and uncertainty. Thinking: Psychological perspectives on reasoning, judgment, and decision making 2003, 125-145. Wiley, Chichester. D. Hardman, L. Macchi (Eds.).
47. Teigen K.H., Brun W. Verbal probabilities: A question of frame?. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2003, 16:53-72. 10.1002/bdm.432.
48. Teigen K.H., Karevold K.I. Looking back versus looking ahead: Framing of time and work at different stages of a project. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2005, 18:229-246. 10.1002/bdm.502.
49. Theil M. The role of translations of verbal into numerical probability expressions in risk management: A meta-analysis. Journal of Risk Research 2002, 5:177-186. 10.1080/13669870110038179.
50. Villejoubert G., Mandel D.R. The inverse fallacy: An account of deviations from Bayes's theorem and the additivity principle. Memory & Cognition 2002, 30:171-178.
51. Villejoubert G., Almond L., Alison L. Interpreting claims in offender profiles: The role of probability phrases, base-rates and perceived dangerousness. Applied Cognitive Psychology 2009, 22:1-19. 10.1002/acp.1438.
52. Wallsten T.S., Budescu D.V., Zwick R., Kemp S.M. Preference and reasons for communicating probabilistic information in numerical or verbal terms. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 1993, 31:135-138.
53. Windschitl P.D., Wells G.L. The alternative-outcomes effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1998, 75:1411-1423. 10.1037/0022-3514.75.6.1411.
54. Windschitl P.D., Young M.E. The influence of alternative outcomes on gut-level perceptions of certainty. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2001, 85:109-134. 10.1006/obhd.2000.2934.
55. Witteman C., Renooij S., Koele P. Medicine in words and numbers: A cross-sectional survey comparing probability assessment scales. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2007, 7:13-20. 10.1186/1472-6947-7-13.