Numeric social-media posts engage people with climate science.

Innumeracy (lack of math skills) among nonscientists often leads climate scientists and others to avoid communicating numbers due to concerns that the public will not understand them and may disengage. However, people often report preferring to receive numbers; providing them also can improve decisions. Here, we demonstrated that the presence vs. absence of at least one Arabic integer in climate-related social-media posts increased sharing up to 31.7% but, counter to hypothesis, decreased liking of messages 5.2% in two preregistered observational studies (climate scientists on Twitter, N  > 8 million Tweets; climate subreddit, N  > 17,000 posts and comments). We speculated that the decreased liking was due, not to reduced engagement, but to more negative feelings towards climate-related content described with numeric precision. A preregistered within-participant experiment (N = 212) then varied whether climate consequences were described using Arabic integers (e.g. "90%") or another format (e.g. verbal terms, "almost all"). The presence of Arabic integers about consequences led to more sharing, wanting to find out more, and greater trust and perceptions of an expert messenger; perceived trust and expertise appeared to mediate effects on sharing and wanting to find out more. Arabic integers about consequences again led to more negative feelings about the Tweets as if numbers clarified the dismaying magnitude of climate threats. Our results indicate that harnessing the power of numbers could increase public trust and concern regarding this defining issue of our time. Communicators, however, should also consider counteracting associated negative feelings-that could halt action-by providing feasible solutions to increase people's self-efficacy.

Demographic characteristics and trends of cell phone use while driving citations in selected states in the United States, 2010-2020.

OBJECTIVE: Distracted driving is a leading cause of motor vehicle crashes, and cell phone use is a major source of in-vehicle distraction. Many states in the United States have enacted cell phone use laws to regulate drivers' cell phone use behavior to enhance traffic safety. Numerous studies have examined the effects of such laws on drivers' cell phone use behavior based on self-reported and roadside observational data. However, little was known about who actually violated the laws at the enforcement level. This study sought to uncover the demographic characteristics of drivers cited for cell phone use while driving and whether these characteristics changed over time since the enactment of cell phone laws. METHODS: We acquired useable traffic citation data for 7 states in the United States from 2010 to 2020 and performed descriptive and regression analyses. RESULTS: Male drivers were cited more for cell phone use while driving. Handheld and texting bans were associated with a greater proportion of cited drivers aged 40 and above, compared to texting-only bans. Trends in the citations issued based on drivers' age group following the enactment of different cell phone laws were also uncovered. The proportion of citations issued to drivers aged 60 and above increased over time but the temporal trend remained insignificant when population effect was considered. CONCLUSIONS: This study examined the demographic characteristics of drivers cited for cell phone use while driving in selected states with texting-only bans or handheld and texting bans. The results reveal policy-based differences in trends in the proportion of citations issued to drivers in different age groups.

Evidence-Based Communication to Increase Melanoma Knowledge and Skin Checks.

Rates of melanoma-the deadliest form of skin cancer-have increased. Early detection can save lives, and patients have a critical role to play in checking their skin. We aim to identify health communication messages that best educate the public and increase intentions toward skin checks. After viewing messages intended to increase melanoma knowledge, participants correctly identified a greater proportion (74.6 vs 70.4%) of moles (mean number = 17.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 17.5-18.3 vs 16.9, 95% CI = 16.6-17.3; P < .001, partial eta-squared = 0.03) and had knowledge of more melanoma warning signs (mean number = 5.8, 95% CI = 5.7-5.8 vs 5.6, 95% CI = 5.5-5.7, P = .01, partial eta-squared = 0.02). After viewing messages intended to increase self-confidence in checking their skin accurately, they were also more likely to report greater intentions to do a skin check on a scale of 1-5 (mean number = 3.8, 95% CI = 3.7-3.9 vs 3.6, 95% CI = 3.4-3.7, P = .005, partial eta-squared = 0.02). Online melanoma messages aimed at increasing both melanoma knowledge and skin-check confidence may be most effective in improving the accuracy of skin self-examinations and intentions to do them.

A comparison of licensed driver counts from the Federal Highway Administration and driver licensing agencies in 11 states.

Objective: Those who study motor vehicle crashes may rely on counts of licensed drivers to estimate crash, injury, or fatality rates. These counts may be obtained from the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) annual Highway Statistics Series or directly from state driver licensing agencies. However, previous studies have questioned the accuracy of these counts provided by the FHWA.Methods: To investigate this issue, we compared counts of licensed drivers from the FHWA and state licensing agencies in 11 states, categorized by sex and age group, from 2013 through 2017. We then assessed the impact of any potential differences by fitting two sets of Poisson regression models to estimate age- and sex-based driver fatality rate ratios. One set of models used counts from the FHWA as the offset and the other used counts from state licensing agencies.Results: Our analysis found that the differences between FHWA and state counts varied markedly. Seven states had substantial differences for at least one age group that spanned the entire study period. In several cases, these differences in license counts were large enough to produce directly contradictory driver fatality rate ratio estimates when comparing age groups.Conclusions: These findings highlight the continued concern regarding the accuracy of licensed driver counts from the FHWA and extend previous studies by illustrating the impact of using FHWA counts on statistical inference. We recommend against using these data for traffic safety research or policy evaluation. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the need for a centralized, easily accessible database for licensed driver data.

Ironic effects of political ideology and increased risk-taking in Ohio drivers during COVID-19 shutdown.

In March 2020, Ohio, along with many other states, enacted a stay-at-home order (i.e., "shutdown") to limit the spread of COVID-19. As a result of lower traffic, crashes should also have declined. We investigated whether crash rates declined in Ohio during the stay-at-home order and explore possible predictors for the decrease, such as reduced travel in compliance with the order, along with speeding, alcohol, and drug use. In addition, we examined whether support for President Trump would relate to greater travel and greater crashes (particularly during the stay-at-home order, when greater travel indicated lower compliance). The overall rate of crashes fell as people stayed home, mainly due to a decline in minor crashes. In contrast, the rate of serious crashes did not fall. Instead, percentage of alcohol-related crashes increased during the stay-at-home order, and the reduction in travel was associated with greater speeding-related crashes. Because alcohol and speeding tend to increase crash severity, these two factors may explain why severe crash rates were not reduced by lower traffic. Instead, it appears that those drivers remaining on the roads during the shutdown may have been more prone to risky behaviors, evidenced by a greater percentage of alcohol-related crashes across the state during the shutdown and greater speed-related crashes in counties with less traffic. In addition, county-level support for President Trump indirectly predicted greater rates of crashes (of all types) via increased travel (i.e., lower compliance with the shutdown), even while controlling for county-level income, rurality, and Appalachian region. Importantly, this mediated effect was stronger during the weeks of the shutdown, when greater travel indicated lower compliance. Thus, lower compliance with the stay-at-home order and increased risky driving behaviors by remaining drivers may explain why lower traffic did not lead to lower serious crashes.

Excluding numeric side-effect information produces lower vaccine intentions.

Encouraging vaccine uptake is important to reducing the impact of infectious disease. However, negative attitudes and vaccine hesitancy, due in part to worry about side effects, are obstacles to achieving high vaccination rates. Provided vaccine information sheets typically include a list of side effects without numeric information about their likelihoods, but providing such numbers may yield benefits. We investigated the effect of providing numeric information about side-effect likelihood (e.g., "1%") and verbal labels (e.g., "uncommon") on intentions to get a hypothetical vaccine, reasons for the vaccination decision, and risk overestimation. In a diverse, online, convenience sample (N = 595), providing numeric information increased vaccine intentions-70% of those who received numeric information were predicted to be moderately or extremely likely to vaccinate compared to only 54% of those who did not receive numeric information (p<.001), controlling for age, gender, race, education, and political ideology. Participants receiving numeric information also were less likely to overestimate side-effect likelihood. Verbal labels had additional benefits when included with numeric information, particularly among the vaccine hesitant. For these participants, verbal labels increased vaccine intentions when included with numeric information (but not in its absence). Among the vaccine-hesitant, 43% of those provided numeric information and verbal labels were predicted to be moderately or extremely likely to get vaccinated vs. only 24% of those given a list of side effects (p<.001). We conclude that the standard practice of not providing numeric information about side-effect likelihood leads to a less-informed public who is less likely to vaccinate.

Numeracy and the Motivational Mind: The Power of Numeric Self-efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Objective numeracy appears to support better medical decisions and health outcomes. The more numerate generally understand and use numbers more and make better medical decisions, including more informed medical choices. Numeric self-efficacy-an aspect of subjective numeracy that is also known as numeric confidence-also relates to decision making via emotional reactions to and inferences from experienced difficulty with numbers and via persistence linked with numeric comprehension and healthier behaviors over time. Furthermore, it moderates the effects of objective numeracy on medical outcomes. PURPOSE: We briefly review the numeracy and decision-making literature and then summarize more recent literature on 3 separable effects of numeric self-efficacy. Although dual-process theories can account for the generally superior decision making of the highly numerate, they have neglected effects of numeric self-efficacy. We discuss implications for medical decision-making (MDM) research and practice. Finally, we propose a modification to dual-process theories, adding a "motivational mind" to integrate the effects of numeric self-efficacy on decision-making processes (i.e., inferences from experienced difficulty with numbers, greater persistence, and greater use of objective-numeracy skills) important to high-quality MDM. CONCLUSIONS: The power of numeric self-efficacy (confidence) has been little considered in MDM, but many medical decisions and behaviors require persistence to be successful over time (e.g., comprehension, medical-recommendation adherence). Including numeric self-efficacy in research and theorizing will increase understanding of MDM and promote development of better decision interventions. HIGHLIGHTS: Research demonstrates that objective numeracy supports better medical decisions and health outcomes.The power of numeric self-efficacy (aka numeric confidence) has been little considered but appears critical to emotional reactions and inferences that patients and others make when encountering numeric information (e.g., in decision aids) and to greater persistence in medical decision-making tasks involving numbers.The present article proposes a novel modification to dual-process theory to account for newer findings and to describe how numeracy mechanisms can be better understood.Because being able to adapt interventions to improve medical decisions depends in part on having a good theory, future research should incorporate numeric self-efficacy into medical decision-making theories and interventions.

Ability-related political polarization in the COVID-19 pandemic.

In two large-scale longitudinal datasets (combined N = 5761), we investigated ability-related political polarization in responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed more polarization with greater ability in emotional responses, risk perceptions, and product-purchase intentions across five waves of data collection with a diverse, convenience sample from February 2020 through July 2020 (Study 1, N = 1267). Specifically, more liberal participants had more negative emotional responses and greater risk perceptions of COVID-19 than conservative participants. Compared to conservatives, liberal participants also interpreted quantitative information as indicating higher COVID-19 risk and sought COVID-related news more from liberal than conservative news media. Of key importance, we also compared verbal and numeric cognitive abilities for their independent capacity to predict greater polarization. Although measures of numeric ability, such as objective numeracy, are often used to index ability-related polarization, ideological differences were more pronounced among those higher in verbal ability specifically. Similar results emerged in secondary analysis of risk perceptions in a nationally representative longitudinal dataset (Study 2, N = 4494; emotions and purchase intentions were not included in this dataset). We further confirmed verbal-ability-related polarization findings on non-COVID policy attitudes (i.e., weapons bans and Medicare-for-all) measured cross-sectionally. The present Study 2 documented ability-related polarization emerging over time for the first time (rather than simply measuring polarization in existing beliefs). Both studies demonstrated verbal ability measures as the most robust predictors of ability-related polarization. Together, these results suggest that polarization may be a function of the amount and/or application of verbal knowledge rather than selective application of quantitative reasoning skills.

Support for legislative, technological, and organizational strategies to reduce cellphone use while driving: Psychological predictors and influences of language.

OBJECTIVE: A large body of research has established that cellphone use while driving (CUWD) is common and dangerous. However, little research has been conducted about how people react psychologically to various distraction-reduction strategies and, ultimately, support or do not support them. Understanding support for reduction is important for predicting use of technological solutions and compliance with laws and for improving communication and education about the risks of CUWD. METHODS: We measured support for a variety of legislative, technological, and organizational strategies to reduce CUWD in an online sample of American drivers (N = 648). We also developed evidence-based communication techniques, describing strategies in terms of benefits vs. costs or using freedom-invoking vs. freedom-reducing language to assess what would influence support. RESULTS: Support for CUWD reduction was generally high. It was predicted by driver characteristics and beliefs. For example, drivers who supported reducing CUWD more also had lower CUWD reactance, greater anti-CUWD beliefs, higher personal risk perceptions of CUWD, and greater self-reported distracted driving. Age and perceived ability to drive distracted did not predict overall support. However, two strategies that allow for handsfree phone use were supported more by people who engaged in more CUWD, perceived they had greater ability to CUWD, perceived more benefits to CUWD, had more positive affect to cellphones, and were younger. Communication techniques also influenced support. Specifically, the same strategy was supported more when described using benefits and permissive language instead of costs and restrictive language. CONCLUSIONS: Most respondents supported strategies to reduce CUWD, and beliefs about risks and benefits predicted this snupport. Reactance to CUWD messaging emerged as a key predictor of lower support (and of greater self-reported distracted driving), indicating that it could be an important variable to consider when designing strategies to reduce CUWD. When targeting people resistant to quitting CUWD entirely, communicators could recommend a switch to handsfree use. Communicators who emphasize benefits and use permissive language also may increase support for CUWD reduction.

Dehumanization During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Communities often unite during a crisis, though some cope by ascribing blame or stigmas to those who might be linked to distressing life events. In a preregistered two-wave survey, we evaluated the dehumanization of Asians and Asian Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our first wave (March 26-April 2, 2020; N = 917) revealed dehumanization was prevalent, between 6.1% and 39% of our sample depending on measurement. Compared to non-dehumanizers, people who dehumanized also perceived the virus as less risky to human health and caused less severe consequences for infected people. They were more likely to be ideologically Conservative and believe in conspiracy theories about the virus. We largely replicated the results 1 month later in our second wave (May 6-May 13, 2020; N = 723). Together, many Americans dehumanize Asians and Asian Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic with related perceptions that the virus is less problematic. Implications and applications for dehumanization theory are discussed.

Numeracy and memory for risk probabilities and risk outcomes depicted on cigarette warning labels.

OBJECTIVE: Greater numeracy is associated with higher likelihood to quit smoking. We examined whether numeracy supports learning of numeric health-risk information and, in turn, greater risk perceptions and quit intentions. METHOD: Adult smokers (N = 696) viewed text warnings with numeric risk information four times each in one of three warning-label types (text-only, low-emotion pictorial [i.e., with image], high-emotion pictorial). They completed posttest measures immediately or 6 weeks later. Emotional reactions to warnings were reported the second time participants viewed the warnings. Numeracy, memory for risk probabilities and risk outcomes, risk perceptions, and quit intentions were assessed postexposures. RESULTS: Memory for risk probabilities and risk outcomes depended on warning-label type and posttest timing. Consistent with memory-consolidation theory, memory for high- versus low-emotion labels was lower immediately, but declined less for high-than low-emotion labels. Label memory was similar between conditions at 6 weeks. Numeracy predicted overall superior memory (especially for risk probabilities) controlling for health literacy and education. It also indirectly predicted greater risk perceptions and quit intentions via memory. In exploratory analyses, however, the superior recall of risk probabilities of smoking among those higher in numeracy was associated with lower risk perceptions. CONCLUSIONS: Numeracy is associated with superior risk memory, which relates to greater risk perceptions and quit intentions. More numerate and educated smokers may be better able to quit due to their superior learning of smoking's risks. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Despite high objective numeracy, lower numeric confidence relates to worse financial and medical outcomes.

People often laugh about being "no good at math." Unrecognized, however, is that about one-third of American adults are likely too innumerate to operate effectively in financial and health environments. Two numeric competencies conceivably matter-objective numeracy (ability to "run the numbers" correctly; like literacy but with numbers) and numeric self-efficacy (confidence that provides engagement and persistence in numeric tasks). We reasoned, however, that attaining objective numeracy's benefits should depend on numeric confidence. Specifically, among the more objectively numerate, having more numeric confidence (vs. less) should lead to better outcomes because they persist in numeric tasks and have the skills to support numeric success. Among the less objectively numerate, however, having more (vs. less) numeric confidence should hurt outcomes, as they also persist, but make unrecognized mistakes. Two studies were designed to test the generalizability of this hypothesized interaction. We report secondary analysis of financial outcomes in a diverse US dataset and primary analysis of disease activity among systemic lupus erythematosus patients. In both domains, best outcomes appeared to require numeric calculation skills and the persistence of numeric confidence. "Mismatched" individuals (high ability/low confidence or low ability/high confidence) experienced the worst outcomes. For example, among the most numerate patients, only 7% of the more numerically confident had predicted disease activity indicative of needing further treatment compared with 31% of high-numeracy/low-confidence patients and 44% of low-numeracy/high-confidence patients. Our work underscores that having 1 of these competencies (objective numeracy or numeric self-efficacy) does not guarantee superior outcomes.

Pictorial Warning Labels and Memory for Cigarette Health-risk Information Over Time.

BACKGROUND: Pictorial cigarette warning labels are thought to increase risk knowledge, but experimental research has not examined longer-term effects on memory for health risks named in text. PURPOSE: To investigate memory-consolidation predictions that high- versus low-emotion warnings would support better long-term memory for named cigarette health risks and to test a mediational model of warning-label effects through memory on risk perceptions and quit intentions. METHODS: A combined sample of U.S.-representative adult smokers, U.S.-representative teen smokers/vulnerable smokers, and Appalachian-representative adult smokers were randomly assigned to a warning-label condition (High-emotion pictorial, Low-emotion pictorial, Text-only) in which they were exposed four times to nine warning labels and reported emotional reactions and elaboration. Memory of warning-label risk information, smoking risk perceptions, and quit intentions were assessed immediately after exposures or 6 weeks later. RESULTS: Recall of warning-label text was low across the samples and supported memory-consolidation predictions. Specifically, immediate recall was highest for Low-emotion warnings that elicited the least emotion, but recall also declined the most over time in this condition, leaving its 6-week recall lowest; 6-week recall was similar for High-emotion and Text-only warnings. Greater recall was associated with higher risk perceptions and greater quit intentions and mediated part of warning-label effects on these important smoking outcomes. High-emotion warnings had additional non-memory-related effects on risk perceptions and quit intentions that were superior to text-only warnings. CONCLUSIONS: High- but not Low-emotion pictorial warning labels may support the Food and Drug Administration's primary goal to "effectively convey the negative health consequences of smoking." CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03375840.

Improving numeracy through values affirmation enhances decision and STEM outcomes.

Greater numeracy has been correlated with better health and financial outcomes in past studies, but causal effects in adults are unknown. In a 9-week longitudinal study, undergraduate students, all taking a psychology statistics course, were randomly assigned to a control condition or a values-affirmation manipulation intended to improve numeracy. By the final week in the course, the numeracy intervention (statistics-course enrollment combined with values affirmation) enhanced objective numeracy, subjective numeracy, and two decision-related outcomes (financial literacy and health-related behaviors). It also showed positive indirect-only effects on financial outcomes and a series of STEM-related outcomes (course grades, intentions to take more math-intensive courses, later math-intensive courses taken based on academic transcripts). All decision and STEM-related outcome effects were mediated by the changes in objective and/or subjective numeracy and demonstrated similar and robust enhancements. Improvements to abstract numeric reasoning can improve everyday outcomes.