Age, numeracy, and cultural differences in Chinese and American adolescents’ performance on the ratio bias task

Klaczynski, Paul A.; Amsel, Eric; Felmban, Wejdan S.

doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2019.104669

Cited by 2 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although characteristics such as cognitive abilities influence the occurrence of cognitive biases (Campitelli & Labollita, 2010;Cokely & Kelley, 2009;Oechssler et al, 2009;Ohlert & Weißenberger, 2015;Pacini & Epstein, 1999b;Peters et al, 2006;Toplak et al, 2011;Trippas et al, 2015), few studies have focused on the ratio bias. Klaczynski et al (2019) and Liberali et al (2012) found a significant relationship between numeracy and the ratio bias, whereas Stone et al (2018) did not. One study suggests an impact of gender (Bourdin & Vetschera, 2018) and others of age (e.g., Klaczynski et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Numeracy, defined as the ability to understand and apply basic mathematical concepts and arithmetical operations (Peters et al, 2006), reduces biased behavior (e.g., Cokely et al, 2018;Ghazal et al, 2014;Reyna & Brainerd, 2008;Weller et al, 2013). Klaczynski et al (2019) found that more numerate individuals are less likely to exhibit a ratio bias. In a more fine-grained analysis, Liberali et al (2012) found that two aspects of numeracy (proportional reasoning and understanding relative magnitudes) impact the ratio bias.…”

Section: Numeracy and Risk Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Klaczynski et al. (2019) found that more numerate individuals are less likely to exhibit a ratio bias. In a more fine‐grained analysis, Liberali et al.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Klaczynski et al. (2019) and Liberali et al. (2012) found a significant relationship between numeracy and the ratio bias, whereas Stone et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…(2018) did not. One study suggests an impact of gender (Bourdin & Vetschera, 2018) and others of age (e.g., Klaczynski et al., 2019). We contribute to resolving this ambiguity by simultaneously examining the effects of individuals' rationality and experientiality, numeracy, overconfidence, age, and gender on their propensity for the ratio bias.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Is there more than one ratio bias? If so, why?

Bourdin¹,

Engin

Vetschera

2021

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ratio bias refers to decision makers' propensity to overestimate probabilities that are specified as ratios of large numbers in comparison to a ratio of smaller numbers (e.g., 9:100 vs. 1:10). To reconcile conflicting findings about this bias, we study such deviations in a more general setting allowing for deviations in both directions, irrational indifference, and inability to decide. We find that the predominant direction of deviations depends on the probabilities involved and that there is no uniform bias in favor of high numbers across all settings. Our findings indicate a strong negative impact of risk literacy on all such bias phenomena. We also test the relationship of the ratio bias to rational/experiential system theory and find that, contrary to the theoretical predictions, biased responses tend to take longer time than logically correct answers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Numeracy and Risk Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Klaczynski et al. (2019) found that more numerate individuals are less likely to exhibit a ratio bias. In a more fine‐grained analysis, Liberali et al.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Klaczynski et al. (2019) and Liberali et al. (2012) found a significant relationship between numeracy and the ratio bias, whereas Stone et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Is there more than one ratio bias? If so, why?

Bourdin¹,

Engin

Vetschera

2021

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Affective Distancing Associated with Second Language Use Influences Response to Health Information

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health care delivery depends on effective provider–patient communication. An important issue is whether and how this communication differs for second language (SL) patients. While understanding health information can be impaired by limited English proficiency, we examined a potential benefit of SL use. SL users may be “affectively distanced”, with weaker emotional reactions to content presented in a foreign versus native language (NL). This distancing may have important implications for understanding, and for making decisions and judgements about health information to the extent these processes involve affective responses. For example, patients may respond to diagnostic test results indicating risk of illness with less intense negative affect if the information is presented in their SL. Language differences in affective response may in turn attenuate risk perception for SL versus NL users, with perceived risk being lower while the objective risk associated with test results increases, as predicted by the ‘risk as feelings’ view of risk perception, where perceived risk is based on affective response to the information. On the other hand, risk perception may be more calibrated with objective risk for SL users to the extent that affective distancing encourages SL users to rely on deliberative rather than affective-based, intuitive processes related to risk perception. SL use may also influence attitudes toward and intentions to perform behaviors that address risk because these processes are driven in part by risk perception and memory for the risk information. These processes may also depend on numeracy, defined as the ability to make sense of and rationalize numbers, because it influences risk perception. We tested these predictions in the context of a simulated Electronic Health Record (EHR) patient portal, in which participants were presented diagnostic test results in English from fictional patients. Native English speakers (n = 25), and native Mandarin speakers with higher numeracy (n = 25) and lower numeracy (n = 28) participated in the study. Consistent with the ‘affective distancing’ effect, SL participants with either higher or lower numeracy demonstrated a flatter slope for positive and negative affective responses to the test results compared to NL participants. Moreover, SL participants reported greater perceived risk than NL participants did as objective risk rose. A similar pattern occurred for attitudes toward and intentions to perform behaviors that addressed this risk, especially for treatment health behaviors. On the other hand, language did not influence memory for risk-related information. Our findings extend the affective distancing effect associated with SL use to the health domain and show that this effect influences risk perception and behavioral intentions beyond memory recall and numeracy skills.

show abstract

Age, numeracy, and cultural differences in Chinese and American adolescents’ performance on the ratio bias task

Cited by 2 publications

References 58 publications

Is there more than one ratio bias? If so, why?

Is there more than one ratio bias? If so, why?

Affective Distancing Associated with Second Language Use Influences Response to Health Information

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About