Focusing on What Matters: Restructuring the Presentation of Bayesian Reasoning Problems

We propose that a mismatch in problem presentation and question structures may promote errors on Bayesian reasoning problems. In this task, people determine the likelihood that a positive test actually indicates the presence of a condition. Research has shown that people routinely fail to correctly identify this positive predictive value (PPV). We point out that the typical problem structure is likely to confuse reasoners by focusing on the incorrect reference class for answering this diagnostic question; instead, providing the anchor needed to address the diagnostic question about sensitivity (SEN). Results of two experiments are described in which participants answer diagnostic questions using problems presented with congruent or incongruent reference classes. Aligning reference classes eases both representational and computational difficulties, increasing the proportion who were consistently accurate to an unprecedented 93% on PPV questions, and 69% on SEN questions. Analysis of response components from incongruent problems indicated that many errors reflect difficulties in identifying and applying appropriate values from the problem, which are prerequisite processes that contribute to computational errors. We conclude with a discussion of the need, especially in applied settings and on initial exposure, to adopt problem presentations to guide, rather than confuse, the organization and use of diagnostic information.

[1]  V. Reyna Class inclusion, the conjunction fallacy, and other cognitive illusions , 1991 .

[2]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Visual aids improve diagnostic inferences and metacognitive judgment calibration , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[3]  Valerie F. Reyna,et al.  Semantic Coherence and Inconsistency in Estimating Conditional Probabilities , 2013 .

[4]  M. Galesic,et al.  Who profits from visual aids: overcoming challenges in people's understanding of risks [corrected]. , 2010, Social science & medicine.

[5]  Katharina Böcherer-Linder,et al.  The Impact of Visualizing Nested Sets. An Empirical Study on Tree Diagrams and Unit Squares , 2017, Front. Psychol..

[6]  Daniel Afergan,et al.  Improving Bayesian Reasoning: The Effects of Phrasing, Visualization, and Spatial Ability , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[7]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Structure of Ill Structured Problems , 1973, Artif. Intell..

[8]  Mirta Galesic,et al.  How to Reduce the Effect of Framing on Messages About Health , 2010, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[9]  Gary L. Brase The power of representation and interpretation: Doubling statistical reasoning performance with icons and frequentist interpretations of ambiguous numbers , 2014 .

[10]  Robyn M. Dawes,et al.  Representative thinking in clinical judgment , 1986 .

[11]  V. Reyna,et al.  Numeracy, Ratio Bias, and Denominator Neglect in Judgments of Risk and Probability. , 2008 .

[12]  Gary L. Brase,et al.  When and for whom do frequencies facilitate performance? On the role of numerical literacy , 2012, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[13]  B. Jolly,et al.  Simplification of emergency department discharge instructions improves patient comprehension. , 1995, Annals of emergency medicine.

[14]  I. Gal Adults' Statistical Literacy: Meanings, Components, Responsibilities , 2002 .

[15]  Ruth Beyth-Marom,et al.  The effects of mental steps and compatibility on Bayesian reasoning , 2014, Judgment and Decision Making.

[16]  Ellen Peters,et al.  Development and Testing of an Abbreviated Numeracy Scale: A Rasch Analysis Approach: Rasch-Based Numeracy Scale , 2013 .

[17]  Eric D. Johnson,et al.  Words, numbers, & numeracy: Diminishing individual differences in Bayesian reasoning , 2013 .

[18]  Angeliki Kolovou,et al.  Mathematical problem solving in primary school , 2011 .

[19]  M. Bar-Hillel The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. , 1980 .

[20]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  Frequency versus probability formats in statistical word problems , 2000, Cognition.

[21]  R. Hamm Physicians neglect base rates, and it matters , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[22]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Natural frequencies improve Bayesian reasoning in simple and complex inference tasks , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[23]  G Gigerenzer,et al.  Using natural frequencies to improve diagnostic inferences , 1998, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[24]  A. Furnham,et al.  A literature review of the anchoring effect , 2011 .

[25]  Pierre Dragicevic,et al.  Assessing the Effect of Visualizations on Bayesian Reasoning through Crowdsourcing , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[26]  Eric D. Johnson,et al.  Structural mapping in statistical word problems: A relational reasoning approach to Bayesian inference , 2017, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[27]  P. Johnson-Laird Mental models and probabilistic thinking , 1994, Cognition.

[28]  D. Mandel,et al.  The inverse fallacy: An account of deviations from Bayes’s theorem and the additivity principle , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[29]  H. Simon,et al.  What makes some problems really hard: Explorations in the problem space of difficulty , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[30]  D. Eddy Judgment under uncertainty: Probabilistic reasoning in clinical medicine: Problems and opportunities , 1982 .

[31]  Lisa M. Schwartz,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST Helping Doctors and Patients Make Sense of Health Statistics , 2022 .

[32]  The accuracy of patients' judgments of disease probability and test sensitivity and specificity. , 1998, The Journal of family practice.

[33]  W Kintsch,et al.  Understanding and solving word arithmetic problems. , 1985, Psychological review.

[34]  Michelle Phillipov COMMUNICATING HEALTH RISKS VIA THE MEDIA , 2012 .

[35]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Fault Trees: Sensitivity of Estimated Failure Probabilities to Problem Representation , 2005 .

[36]  G. Gigerenzer,et al.  Teaching Bayesian reasoning in less than two hours. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[37]  Chicago Unbound Libertarian Paternalism Is Not an Oxymoron , 2003 .

[38]  Jane Oakhill,et al.  Compatibility in Decisions and in Models , 2013 .

[39]  Brian R. Jackson,et al.  Primary Care Physicians' Challenges in Ordering Clinical Laboratory Tests and Interpreting Results , 2014, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[40]  Michelene T. H. Chi,et al.  Expertise in Problem Solving. , 1981 .

[41]  D. Hilton THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF REASONING : CONVERSATIONAL INFERENCE AND RATIONAL JUDGMENT , 1995 .

[42]  V. Girotto,et al.  Solving probabilistic and statistical problems: a matter of information structure and question form , 2001, Cognition.

[43]  Miroslav Sirota,et al.  Now you Bayes, now you don’t: effects of set-problem and frequency-format mental representations on statistical reasoning , 2015, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[44]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices , 1981, Cogn. Sci..

[45]  S. Sloman,et al.  Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes. , 2007, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[46]  Gary L. Brase Pictorial representations in statistical reasoning , 2009 .

[47]  P. Young Primary care physicians and cancer care , 2009 .

[48]  Sandra L. Schneider,et al.  Improving Accuracy on Bayesian Inference Problems Using a Brief Tutorial , 2017 .

[49]  Alaina N. Talboy,et al.  Improving Understanding of Diagnostic Test Outcomes , 2018, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[50]  Macchi,et al.  Partitive Formulation of Information in Probabilistic Problems: Beyond Heuristics and Frequency Format Explanations. , 2000, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[51]  L. Macchi Pragmatic Aspects of the Base-rate Fallacy , 1995 .

[52]  A. Avramides Studies in the Way of Words , 1992 .

[53]  Vittorio Girotto,et al.  Basic understanding of posterior probability , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[54]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  How to Improve Bayesian Reasoning Without Instruction: Frequency Formats , 1995 .

[55]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Science Current Directions in Psychological , 2010 .

[56]  L. Cosmides,et al.  Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty , 1996, Cognition.

[57]  Miroslav Sirota,et al.  Ecological rationality or nested sets? Individual differences in cognitive processing predict Bayesian reasoning , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[58]  Elisabet Tubau,et al.  Comprehension and computation in Bayesian problem solving , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[59]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[60]  Jeffrey M. Stibel,et al.  Frequency illusions and other fallacies , 2003 .

[61]  Jill L. Quilici,et al.  Teaching students to recognize structural similarities between statistics word problems , 2002 .

[62]  Gary L. Brase,et al.  Adding up to Good Bayesian Reasoning: Problem Format Manipulations and Individual Skill Differences , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[63]  Laura Macchi,et al.  Thinking About Low-Probability Events , 2004, Psychological science.

[64]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Cognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature* , 1991 .

[65]  Valerie F. Reyna,et al.  Interference processes in fuzzy-trace theory: Aging, Alzheimer's disease, and development. , 2007 .

[66]  Alan H. Schoenfeld,et al.  Mathematical Problem Solving , 1985 .

[67]  Michelle McDowell,et al.  Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Natural Frequencies on Bayesian Reasoning , 2017, Psychological bulletin.

[68]  John Tooby,et al.  Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all , 1996 .

[69]  Lola L. Lopes,et al.  The Role of Aspiration Level in Risky Choice: A Comparison of Cumulative Prospect Theory and SP/A Theory. , 1999, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[70]  R. Holcombe,et al.  Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. , 1998, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[71]  W. Casscells,et al.  Interpretation by physicians of clinical laboratory results. , 1978, The New England journal of medicine.

[72]  Laura M. Curtis,et al.  Effect of Standardized, Patient-Centered Label Instructions to Improve Comprehension of Prescription Drug Use , 2011, Medical care.

[73]  Edgar Erdfelder,et al.  G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[74]  Alan Colman,et al.  Social Context Reasoning , 2016 .

[75]  Miroslav Sirota,et al.  The effect of iconicity of visual displays on statistical reasoning: evidence in favor of the null hypothesis , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[76]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Natural Frequencies Help Older Adults and People with Low Numeracy to Evaluate Medical Screening Tests , 2009, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[77]  M. Chi,et al.  Problem-Solving Ability. , 1985 .

[78]  Ulrich Hoffrage,et al.  Visual representation of statistical information improves diagnostic inferences in doctors and their patients. , 2013, Social science & medicine.

[79]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[80]  Ulrich Hoffrage,et al.  Natural frequencies facilitate diagnostic inferences of managers , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[81]  Edward T. Cokely,et al.  Individual Differences in Graph Literacy: Overcoming Denominator Neglect in Risk Comprehension , 2012 .

[82]  Maria Sonino Legrenzi,et al.  Naive probability: a mental model theory of extensional reasoning. , 1999, Psychological review.