IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v14y2011i9p1039-1055.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Natural frequencies and Bayesian reasoning: the impact of formal education and problem context

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Siegrist
  • Carmen Keller

Abstract

Research suggests that children and adults are able to solve Bayesian problems when natural frequencies are used, but most studies have involved only students or academics. The present research focuses on random samples from the general population. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that the natural-frequency format resulted in more Bayesian responses than the probability format. Results of Experiment 3 showed that when the task is not framed as a medical problem and the numbers are not too difficult, about 40% of the general population could correctly solve the problems. More importantly, the natural-frequency format resulted in a substantial increase in correct answers in the lower level of formal education group. Experiment 4 suggests that the context of a problem influences people's ability to solve a Bayesian problem. Participants were twice as likely to solve a social problem compared with a medical problem. The results of the four experiments show that natural frequency resulted in much better estimates than probabilities. It should be emphasized, however, that even when natural frequencies were used, a majority of participants were not able to solve the problems correctly.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Siegrist & Carmen Keller, 2011. "Natural frequencies and Bayesian reasoning: the impact of formal education and problem context," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(9), pages 1039-1055, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:14:y:2011:i:9:p:1039-1055
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2011.571786
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2011.571786
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2011.571786?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. Carmen Keller & Michael Siegrist, 2009. "Effect of Risk Communication Formats on Risk Perception Depending on Numeracy," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 29(4), pages 483-490, July.
    2. Gerd Gigerenzer & Ralph Hertwig & Eva Van Den Broek & Barbara Fasolo & Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos, 2005. "“A 30% Chance of Rain Tomorrow”: How Does the Public Understand Probabilistic Weather Forecasts?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 623-629, June.
    3. Carmen Keller & Michael Siegrist & Vivianne Visschers, 2009. "Effect of Risk Ladder Format on Risk Perception in High‐ and Low‐Numerate Individuals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9), pages 1255-1264, September.
    4. Michael Siegrist & Marie-Eve Cousin & Carmen Keller, 2008. "Risk communication, prenatal screening, and prenatal diagnosis: the illusion of informed decision-making," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1-2), pages 87-97, January.
    5. Michael Siegrist & Pascale Orlow & Carmen Keller, 2008. "The Effect of Graphical and Numerical Presentation of Hypothetical Prenatal Diagnosis Results on Risk Perception," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(4), pages 567-574, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michelle McDowell & Mirta Galesic & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2018. "Natural Frequencies Do Foster Public Understanding of Medical Tests: Comment on Pighin, Gonzalez, Savadori, and Girotto (2016)," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(3), pages 390-399, April.

    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. Rebecca Hess & Vivianne H.M. Visschers & Michael Siegrist & Carmen Keller, 2011. "How do people perceive graphical risk communication? The role of subjective numeracy," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 47-61, January.
    2. Milou Kievik & Ellen F.J. ter Huurne & Jan M. Gutteling, 2012. "The action suited to the word? Use of the framework of risk information seeking to understand risk-related behaviors," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 131-147, February.
    3. Helen Fischer & Stefanie Schütte & Anneliese Depoux & Dorothee Amelung & Rainer Sauerborn, 2018. "How Well Do COP22 Attendees Understand Graphs on Climate Change Health Impacts from the Fifth IPCC Assessment Report?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-11, April.
    4. Carmen Keller, 2011. "Using a Familiar Risk Comparison Within a Risk Ladder to Improve Risk Understanding by Low Numerates: A Study of Visual Attention," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(7), pages 1043-1054, July.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:5:p:420-432 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Garcia-Retamero, Rocio & Hoffrage, Ulrich, 2013. "Visual representation of statistical information improves diagnostic inferences in doctors and their patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 27-33.
    7. Stephan Dickert & Janet Kleber & Ellen Peters & Paul Slovic, 2011. "Numeracy as a precursor to pro-social behavior: The impact of numeracy and presentation format on the cognitive mechanisms underlying donation decisions," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(7), pages 638-650, October.
    8. Caroline M. Vass & Niall J. Davison & Geert Stichele & Katherine Payne, 2020. "A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words: The Role of Survey Training Materials in Stated-Preference Studies," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 13(2), pages 163-173, April.
    9. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim W. F. Passchier & Nanne N. K. De Vries, 2009. "Probability Information in Risk Communication: A Review of the Research Literature," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 267-287, February.
    10. Carmen Keller & Christina Kreuzmair & Rebecca Leins-Hess & Michael Siegrist, 2014. "Numeric and graphic risk information processing of high and low numerates in the intuitive and deliberative decision modes: An eye-tracker study," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(5), pages 420-432, September.
    11. Astrid Kause & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Fai Fung & Andrea Taylor & Jason Lowe, 2020. "Visualizations of Projected Rainfall Change in the United Kingdom: An Interview Study about User Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, April.
    12. Marie Juanchich & Miroslav Sirota, 2016. "How to improve people's interpretation of probabilities of precipitation," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 388-404, March.
    13. Lyndal J. Trevena & Carissa Bonner & Yasmina Okan & Ellen Peters & Wolfgang Gaissmaier & Paul K. J. Han & Elissa Ozanne & Danielle Timmermans & Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher, 2021. "Current Challenges When Using Numbers in Patient Decision Aids: Advanced Concepts," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(7), pages 834-847, October.
    14. Paolo Figini & Simona Cicognani & Lorenzo Zirulia, 2023. "Booking in the Rain. Testing the Impact of Public Information on Prices," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 9(3), pages 1329-1364, November.
    15. Manika, Danae & Dickert, Stephan & Golden, Linda L., 2021. "Check (it) yourself before you wreck yourself: The benefits of online health information exposure on risk perception and intentions to protect oneself," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    16. Ambika Markanday & Steffen Kallbekken & Ibon Galarraga, 2022. "The power of impact framing and experience for determining acceptable levels of climate change-induced flood risk: a lab experiment," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 1-18, February.
    17. Fredy S. Monge-Rodríguez & He Jiang & Liwei Zhang & Andy Alvarado-Yepez & Anahí Cardona-Rivero & Enma Huaman-Chulluncuy & Analy Torres-Mejía, 2021. "Psychological Factors Affecting Risk Perception of COVID-19: Evidence from Peru and China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-16, June.
    18. Gruener, Sven, 2021. "Susceptibility to misinformation: a study of climate change, Covid-19, and artificial intelligence," SocArXiv x8efq, Center for Open Science.
    19. V.H.M. Visschers & P.M. Wiedemann & H. Gutscher & S. Kurzenhäuser & R. Seidl & C.G. Jardine & D.R.M. Timmermans, 2012. "Affect-inducing risk communication: current knowledge and future directions," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 257-271, March.
    20. Carmen Keller & Michael Siegrist & Vivianne Visschers, 2009. "Effect of Risk Ladder Format on Risk Perception in High‐ and Low‐Numerate Individuals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9), pages 1255-1264, September.
    21. Gruener, Sven, 2021. "Misinformation: determinants of gullibility," SocArXiv r3fx7, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jriskr:v:14:y:2011:i:9:p:1039-1055. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    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.