IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v185y2024ics0749597824000670.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Numeracy-Task interaction model of perceived differences

Author

Listed:
  • Villanova, Daniel
  • Pandelaere, Mario

Abstract

When people evaluate numerical differences, they can focus on the relative differences or the absolute differences. However, it is unclear who does what and when. The authors propose the Numeracy-Task Interaction Model to provide a framework for understanding individuals’ subjective difference perceptions. With empirical support in four studies, the authors shed light on how numeracy relates to tendencies to weight absolute and relative differences, depending on the type of task at hand. The authors find that numeracy can reduce the influence of absolute differences for some tasks but increase their influence for others. Additionally, sensitivity to relative differences increases for some tasks but not others. These results not only support the model but also generate various recommendations for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Villanova, Daniel & Pandelaere, Mario, 2024. "A Numeracy-Task interaction model of perceived differences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:185:y:2024:i:c:s0749597824000670
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104375
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597824000670
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104375?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wedell, Douglas H. & Senter, Stuart M., 1997. "Looking and Weighting in Judgment and Choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 41-64, April.
    2. Raghubir, Priya & Srivastava, Joydeep, 2002. "Effect of Face Value on Product Valuation in Foreign Currencies," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(3), pages 335-347, December.
    3. Hsee, Christopher K, et al, 2003. "Medium Maximization," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(1), pages 1-14, June.
    4. Orelien, Jean G. & Edwards, Lloyd J., 2008. "Fixed-effect variable selection in linear mixed models using R2 statistics," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 1896-1907, January.
    5. Cokely, Edward T. & Kelley, Colleen M., 2009. "Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk: A protocol analysis and process model evaluation," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 20-33, February.
    6. Ghazal, Saima & Cokely, Edward T. & Garcia-Retamero, Rocio, 2014. "Predicting biases in very highly educated samples: Numeracy and metacognition," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 15-34, January.
    7. Bartels, Daniel M., 2006. "Proportion dominance: The generality and variability of favoring relative savings over absolute savings," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 76-95, May.
    8. Rajesh Bagchi & Xingbo Li, 2011. "Illusionary Progress in Loyalty Programs: Magnitudes, Reward Distances, and Step-Size Ambiguity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(5), pages 888-901.
    9. Christopher K. Hsee & Yang Yang & Yangjie Gu & Jie Chen, 2009. "Specification Seeking: How Product Specifications Influence Consumer Preference," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(6), pages 952-966, April.
    10. Ashwani Monga & Rajesh Bagchi, 2012. "Years, Months, and Days versus 1, 12, and 365: The Influence of Units versus Numbers," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(1), pages 185-198.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i:6:p:435-448 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Grewal, Dhruv & Marmorstein, Howard, 1994. "Market Price Variation, Perceived Price Variation, and Consumers' Price Search Decisions for Durable Goods," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(3), pages 453-460, December.
    13. Cokely, Edward T. & Galesic, Mirta & Schulz, Eric & Ghazal, Saima & Garcia-Retamero, Rocio, 2012. "Measuring Risk Literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 25-47, January.
    14. Bart de Langhe & Stefano Puntoni, 2015. "Bang for the Buck: Gain-Loss Ratio as a Driver of Judgment and Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1137-1163, May.
    15. M. Pandelaere & B. Briers, 2011. "How to Make a 29% Increase Look Bigger: Numerosity Effects in Option Comparisons," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 11/712, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    16. Keith Wilcox & Sonja Prokopec & Vicki G Morwitz & Amna Kirmani & Rajesh Bagchi, 2019. "Restraint That Blinds: Attention Narrowing and Consumers’ Response to Numerosity in Self-Control Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(2), pages 371-387.
    17. Hess, Rebecca & Visschers, Vivianne H. M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2011. "Risk communication with pictographs: The role of numeracy and graph processing," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 263-274, April.
    18. Isaac M. Lipkus & Greg Samsa & Barbara K. Rimer, 2001. "General Performance on a Numeracy Scale among Highly Educated Samples," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(1), pages 37-44, February.
    19. Andrea H. Tangari & Scot Burton & Cassandra Davis, 2014. "Do They Have Your Number? Understanding the Moderating Role of Format Effects and Consumer Numeracy for Quantitative Front-of-Package Nutrition Claims," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 620-633, October.
    20. Cadario, Romain & Parguel, Béatrice & Benoit-Moreau, Florence, 2016. "Is bigger always better? The unit effect in carbon emissions information," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 204-207.
    21. Gourville, John T, 1998. "Pennies-a-Day: The Effect of Temporal Reframing on Transaction Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(4), pages 395-408, March.
    22. Mario Pandelaere & Barbara Briers & Christophe Lembregts, 2011. "How to Make a 29% Increase Look Bigger: The Unit Effect in Option Comparisons," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 38(2), pages 308-322.
    23. Peters, Ellen & Levin, Irwin P., 2008. "Dissecting the risky-choice framing effect: Numeracy as an individual-difference factor in weighting risky and riskless options," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(6), pages 435-448, August.
    24. Klaus Wertenbroch & Dilip Soman & Amitava Chattopadhyay, 2007. "On the Perceived Value of Money: The Reference Dependence of Currency Numerosity Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(1), pages 1-10, March.
    25. Christophe Lembregts & Mario Pandelaere, 2013. "Are All Units Created Equal? The Effect of Default Units on Product Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(6), pages 1275-1289.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ohlwein, Martin, 2022. "Same but different - The effect of the unit of measure on the valuation of a unit price," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    2. Santana, Shelle & Thomas, Manoj & Morwitz, Vicki G., 2020. "The Role of Numbers in the Customer Journey," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 138-154.
    3. Fecher, André & Robbert, Thomas & Roth, Stefan, 2019. "Same price, different perception: Measurement-unit effects on price-level perceptions and purchase intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 129-142.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:972-988 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Mario Herberz & Tobias Brosch & Ulf J. J. Hahnel, 2020. "Kilo what? Default units increase value sensitivity in joint evaluations of energy efficiency," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(6), pages 972-988, November.
    6. C. Lembregts & M. Pandelaere, 2012. "Are All Units Created Equal?: The Effect of Default Units on Product Evaluations," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/812, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    7. Fecher, André & Robbert, Thomas & Roth, Stefan, 2020. "Per piece or per kilogram? Default-unit effects in retailing," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    8. Li, Yi & Pandelaere, Mario, 2021. "The denomination–spending matching effect," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 338-349.
    9. Hsin-Hsien Liu & Hsuan-Yi Chou, 2022. "Attribute specification effect on hedonic and utilitarian options," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 47(2), pages 322-341, May.
    10. Zoe Y. Lu & Christopher K. Hsee & Kaiyang Wu, 2024. "Short-Asking with Long-Encouraging (SALE): A simple method to increase purchase quantity," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1152-1170, July.
    11. Huang, Wen-Hsien & Cheng, Yi-Ching, 2015. "Threshold free shipping policies for internet shoppers," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 193-203.
    12. Yang, Bi & Ye, Tian & Liu, Stephanie Q. & Zhao, Yujie, 2024. "How consumers process online hotel ratings," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    13. Antonio J. Morales & Enrique Fatas, 2021. "Price competition and nominal illusion: experimental evidence and a behavioural model," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 607-632, December.
    14. Spiller, Stephen A. & Ariely, Dan, 2020. "How does the perceived value of a medium of exchange depend on its set of possible uses?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 188-200.
    15. Lembregts, Christophe & Pandelaere, Mario, 2014. ""A 20% income increase for everyone?": The effect of relative increases in income on perceived income inequality," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 37-47.
    16. Arnaud Monnier & Manoj Thomas, 2022. "Experiential and Analytical Price Evaluations: How Experiential Product Description Affects Prices [The Utility of an Information Processing Approach for Behavioral Price Research]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(4), pages 574-594.
    17. Cho, Yoon-Na & Taylor, Charles R., 2020. "The role of ambiguity and skepticism in the effectiveness of sustainability labeling," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 379-388.
    18. Ho, Edward & Kowatsch, Tobias & Ilic, Alexander, 2014. "The Sales Velocity Effect on Retailing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 237-256.
    19. Rashmi Adaval, 2013. "The utility of an information processing approach for behavioral price research," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(3), pages 130-134, September.
    20. Tatiana Sokolova, 2023. "Days-of-the-Week Effect in Temporal Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 50(1), pages 167-189.
    21. Jonathan W. Leland & Mark Schneider, 2016. "Salience, Framing, and Decisions under Risk, Uncertainty, and Time," Working Papers 16-08, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:185:y:2024:i:c:s0749597824000670. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.