Numeracy Predicts More Effortful and Elaborative Search Strategies in a Complex Risky Choice Context: A Process‐Tracing Approach

The goal of the current study was to explore information search and processing differences between individuals who are less and more numerate in an attempt to better understand the mechanisms that might differentiate the choices they make. We did so using a computerized process-tracing system known as MouseTrace, which presented monetary gambles in an alternative × attribute matrix with outcome (dollar amount) and probability information as attributes. This information was initially occluded but could be revealed by clicking on the cell that contained the desired information. Beginning with nine gambles offering the chance of gaining or losing a specified amount, participants (N = 110) narrowed down the options (to three and then one) using an inclusion or exclusion strategy. Consistent with previous research, inclusion was a more effortful strategy, and individuals who were higher in numeracy were more likely to select prospects with the highest expected value. Process measures revealed these individuals expended more effort (i.e., attended to and sought out more information and processed it in greater depth) and exhibited more compensatory processing than those who were lower in numeracy, but this sometimes depended on whether one was asked to include or exclude. These results serve as further evidence that individuals with higher levels of numeracy often engage in more elaborative processing of the decision task, which tends to lead to more optimal choices. However, they also suggest that individuals are adaptive and that the specific situation can matter. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  K. Stanovich,et al.  The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks , 2011, Memory & cognition.

[2]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Predicting biases in very highly educated samples: Numeracy and metacognition , 2014, Judgment and Decision Making.

[3]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk: A protocol analysis and process model evaluation , 2009, Judgment and Decision Making.

[4]  P. Slovic,et al.  The Use of Narrative Evidence and Explicit Likelihood by Decisionmakers Varying in Numeracy , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[5]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  Caveats on a process-tracing measure and a remedy , 1994 .

[6]  Levin,et al.  Information Processing at Successive Stages of Decision Making: Need for Cognition and Inclusion-Exclusion Effects. , 2000, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[7]  Tomasz Zaleskiewicz,et al.  When Does Information about Probability Count in Choices Under Risk? , 2006, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[8]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  Numeric and graphic risk information processing of high and low numerates in the intuitive and deliberative decision modes: An eye-tracker study , 2014, Judgment and Decision Making.

[9]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision Making. , 1988 .

[10]  J. Ford,et al.  Process tracing methods: Contributions, problems, and neglected research questions , 1989 .

[11]  E. Peters.  Beyond Comprehension , 2012 .

[12]  Tehila Kogut,et al.  Choosing what I want or keeping what I should: The effect of decision strategy on choice consistency , 2011 .

[13]  Stacey Wood,et al.  Numeracy and Medicare Part D: the importance of choice and literacy for numbers in optimizing decision making for Medicare's prescription drug program. , 2011, Psychology and aging.

[14]  C. K. Mertz,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Numeracy and Decision Making , 2022 .

[15]  V. Reyna,et al.  How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. , 2009, Psychological bulletin.

[16]  M. Siegrist,et al.  How do people perceive graphical risk communication? The role of subjective numeracy , 2011 .

[17]  A. Bechara,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Neural Correlates of Adaptive Decision Making for Risky Gains and Losses , 2022 .

[18]  David Mazursky,et al.  New directions in behavioral process research: Implications for social psychology , 1987 .

[19]  I P Levin,et al.  Validating a new process tracing method for decision making , 2001, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[20]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  Preference Reversals between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Options: A Review and Theoretical Analysis , 1999 .

[21]  J. Payne,et al.  Exploring predecisional behavior: An alternative approach to decision research , 1978 .

[22]  B. Littenberg,et al.  Prevalence of Limited Health Literacy and Compensatory Strategies Used by Hospitalized Patients , 2011, Nursing research.

[23]  John W. Payne,et al.  Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis☆ , 1976 .

[24]  O. Huber,et al.  Active information search and complete information presentation in naturalistic risky decision tasks , 1997 .

[25]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Measuring Risk Literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test , 2012, Judgment and Decision Making.

[26]  E. Peters,et al.  Dissecting the risky-choice framing effect: Numeracy as an individual-difference factor in weighting risky and riskless options , 2008, Judgment and Decision Making.

[27]  Ellen Peters,et al.  Understanding the Role of Numeracy in Health: Proposed Theoretical Framework and Practical Insights , 2009, Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education.

[28]  C. K. Mertz,et al.  Bringing meaning to numbers: the impact of evaluative categories on decisions. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[29]  Irwin P. Levin,et al.  Risk preferences in young children: early evidence of individual differences in reaction to potential gains and losses , 2003 .

[30]  M. F. Luce,et al.  The Rationalizing Effects of Cognitive Load on Emotion-Based Trade-off Avoidance , 2004 .

[31]  Yaniv Hanoch,et al.  Choice, numeracy, and physicians-in-training performance: the case of Medicare Part D. , 2010, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[32]  Irwin P. Levin,et al.  Age-related differences in adaptive decision making: Sensitivity to expected value in risky choice , 2007, Judgment and Decision Making.

[33]  J D Jasper,et al.  MouseTrace: A better mousetrap for catching decision processes , 2002, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[34]  Y. Hanoch,et al.  Aging and choice: Applications to Medicare Part D , 2009, Judgment and Decision Making.

[35]  B. Rimer,et al.  General Performance on a Numeracy Scale among Highly Educated Samples , 2001, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[36]  Irwin P. Levin,et al.  Selection of strategies for narrowing choice options: Antecedents and consequences , 2002 .

[37]  I. Levin,et al.  Numeracy as a Predictor of Adaptive Risky Decision Making , 2013 .

[38]  E. Peters,et al.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Multiple Numeric Competencies: When a Number Is Not Just a Number , 2014 .

[39]  Yaacov Schul,et al.  Inclusive and exclusive modes of thinking: Studies of prediction, preference, and social perception during parliamentary elections , 2002 .

[40]  Thorsten Pachur,et al.  Strategy Selection in Risky Choice: The Impact of Numeracy, Affect, and Cross-Cultural Differences , 2013 .

[41]  Y. Hanoch,et al.  Physician Trainees’ Decision Making and Information Processing: Choice Size and Medicare Part D , 2013, PloS one.