Author
Listed:
- Jocelyn Raude
- Christina Xiao
- Pascal Crépey
Abstract
Although people have been repeatedly found to underestimate frequencies of common illnesses and overestimate those of rare illnesses, not much is known about this consistent bias in risk perception, termed “primary bias” in the literature, as well as the origin of its variations among different subpopulations. To fill this gap, we conducted a national survey among a representative sample of the French population (n = 3,245) to compare the perceived and actual prevalence of chronic illnesses, and to test the hypothesis that numeracy may play an important role in the accuracy of judgments of risk frequencies. The participants were asked to complete a 10-items numeracy scale and to estimate the prevalence of a variety of social conditions and chronic illnesses such as cancers or heart diseases by using a percentage scale. The analyses show that (1) participants tend to greatly overestimate the prevalence of conditions affecting small percentages of people, and underestimate those affecting a large percentage of them, (2) the Tversky and Kahneman’s probability weighting function provides an adequate model to represent the discrepancy between the perceived and actual prevalence of these illnesses or occupations, and (3) the magnitude of the primary bias varies principally as a function of the respondents’ numeracy. These results suggest that the primary bias that affects perceptions of prevalence of chronic diseases is not fundamentally different from those characterizing other types of probabilistic judgments. They also confirm that numeracy plays a considerable role in people’s ability to transform epidemiological observations from their social environment into more accurate estimates.
Suggested Citation
Jocelyn Raude & Christina Xiao & Pascal Crépey, 2023.
"Revisiting the primary bias: the role of innumeracy in the misperception of prevalence of chronic illnesses,"
Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 64-82, January.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:26:y:2023:i:1:p:64-82
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2022.2077415
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:26:y:2023:i:1:p:64-82. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.