No abstract

No abstract

Recent studies have illustrated that individuals with higher numeracy are more likely to make adaptive choices than individuals with lower numeracy. Highly numerate individuals can consistently make normatively superior choices by maximizing expected value (EV) in meaningful choice problems (high-payoff condition). However, in trivial problems (low-payoff condition), they can also adaptively change their strategy to make good enough choices and not follow a normatively superior strategy. Upon inspection of choice problems used in earlier studies, it was revealed that payoff was not the only varying factor between the two payoff conditions. Therefore, it is unclear whether payoff conditions alone can provide sufficient context for adaptive modulation in decision strategy. In two pre-registered studies (N = 343), we tested numerate individuals’ adaptiveness under high- and low-payoff conditions addressing the limitations of earlier studies. Results revealed that the presence of two payoff conditions together did not initiate adaptive strategy selection, regardless of participants’ numeracy. Instead, numerate individuals, compared to less numerate individuals, consistently made more EV-consistent choices in both payoff conditions. We identified that the change in EV consistency across payoff conditions was influenced more by the absolute difference than the relative difference in the expected reward.