Visualizing numbers: Investigating the effect of presentation format on emotional responses and performance in lottery tasks.

Numeracy is the ability to understand, manipulate, and make sense of numerical information. It is crucial for everyday decision making that involves dealing with numbers. In this study, we tested whether we can help people make better choices in monetary lotteries by communicating numerical values (i.e., payoffs and probabilities) using visual aids. We also checked whether presenting this information in a visual form reduces affect negativity. Participants (N = 210) made choices in 10 monetary lotteries accompanied with visual aids (experimental condition) or without visual aids (control condition). After the lottery task, participants completed questionnaires measuring experienced emotions and numerical skills. Despite finding no hypothesized effect of visual aids on performance in a lottery task, the exploratory analysis revealed the interaction effect. In a visual aid condition, participants who were relatively less educated scored significantly higher in a lottery task in comparison to those in the control condition. Additionally, participants in the visual aid condition reported significantly lower intensity of negative emotions after the lottery task than those in the control condition. We discuss possible causes and mechanisms that can explain the results we obtained. We argue that visual aids are a promising tool for future learning, and their friendly format can positively influence people's reactions to decisions involving numerical information. However, we also point out the necessity for further research and exploration of the role of different designs of visual aids and individual differences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Visualizing risky situations induces a stronger neural response in brain areas associated with mental imagery and emotions than visualizing non-risky situations.

In an fMRI study, we tested the prediction that visualizing risky situations induces a stronger neural response in brain areas associated with mental imagery and emotions than visualizing non-risky and more positive situations. We assumed that processing mental images that allow for "trying-out" the future has greater adaptive importance for risky than non-risky situations, because the former can generate severe negative outcomes. We identified several brain regions that were activated when participants produced images of risky situations and these regions overlap with brain areas engaged in visual, speech, and movement imagery. We also found that producing images of risky situations, in contrast to non-risky situations, was associated with increased neural activation in the insular cortex and cerebellum-the regions involved, among other functions, in emotional processing. Finally, we observed an increased BOLD signal in the cingulate gyrus associated with reward-based decision making and monitoring of decision outcomes. In summary, risky situations increased neural activation in brain areas involved in mental imagery, emotional processing, and decision making. These findings imply that the evaluation of everyday risky situations may be driven by emotional responses that result from mental imagery.

Measuring feelings about choices and risks: The Berlin Emotional Responses to Risk Instrument (BERRI).

We introduce a brief instrument specifically validated for measuring positive and negative feelings about risks-the Berlin Emotional Responses to Risk Instrument (BERRI). Based on seven studies involving diverse adults from three countries (n = 2120), the BERRI was found to robustly estimate anticipatory affective reactions derived from subjective evaluations of positive (i.e., assured, hopeful, and relieved) and negative emotions (i.e., anxious, afraid, and worried). The brief BERRI outperformed a 14-item assessment, uniquely tracking costs/benefits associated with cancer screening among men and women (Studies 1 and 2). Predictive validity was further documented in paradigmatic risky choice studies wherein options varied over probabilities and severities across six contexts (health, social, financial, technological, ethical, and environmental; Study 3). Studies 4-6, conducted during the Ebola epidemic and COVID-19 pandemic, indicated BERRI responses were sensitive to subtle effects caused by emotion-related framing manipulations presented in different cultures and languages (the United States, Spain, and Poland). Study 7 indicated BERRI responses remained stable for 2 weeks. Although the BERRI can provide an estimate of overall affect, choices were generally better explained by the unique influences of positive and negative affect. Overall, results suggest the novel, brief instrument can be an efficient tool for high-stakes research on decision making and risk communication.

Worry, Risk Perception, and Controllability Predict Intentions Toward COVID-19 Preventive Behaviors.

The ongoing pandemic of COVID-19 has already had serious worldwide health, socio-economic, political, and educational consequences. In the present study, we investigated what factors can motivate young adults to comply with the recommended preventive measures against coronavirus infection. Even though young people are less likely to suffer severe medical consequences from the virus, they can still transmit it to more vulnerable individuals. Surprisingly, we found no significant effects of previously successful experimental manipulations (e.g., enhancing self-efficacy, and visual aids) that aimed to improve risk understanding and impact COVID-19 related behavioral intentions. Instead, intentions toward preventive behaviors were predicted by self-reported worry, perceived controllability of the pandemic, and risk perception. Interestingly, worry about health, and worry about restricting personal freedom predicted behavioral intentions in diverging directions. In particular, participants who were worried about health, were more willing to obey strict hygiene and social distancing restrictions. In contrast, participants who were worried about personal restrictions, were less ready to adopt these preventive actions.

The experience-based format of probability improves probability estimates: The moderating role of individual differences in numeracy.

People with low statistical numeracy have difficulties understanding numerical information. For instance, they often misunderstand the probability of experiencing side effects, which could reduce adherence to medical treatments. We investigated whether presenting information about probability using a method based on the direct experience of events influences the accuracy of probability estimates compared to viewing a static numerical description of the same information. Participants completed a numeracy test and were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. In the description-based probability condition, participants were presented with 24 binomial distributions consisting of a target stimulus "X" and a distractor stimulus "·" in the form of odds (the distribution "7 × 13 ·" is an example of a 35% probability: here the target [distractor] stimulus was present 7[13] times in a 20-stimulus distribution). In the experience-based probability condition, participants observed the same information but the stimuli were randomly arranged and displayed sequentially. Participants in both conditions estimated the probability of the target stimulus in each trial. In the experience-based format participants with low numeracy made more accurate probability estimates in comparison to the description-based format. In contrast, accuracy in participants with high numeracy was similar in the two formats.

Numeracy and Risk Literacy: What Have We Learned so Far?

Numerical skills are essential to make informed decisions in our daily life. Unfortunately, many people lack basic numeracy, which limits their ability to accurately interpret risks (i.e., risk literacy). In this paper, we provide an overview of research investigating the role of numeracy in two prominent domains, where most research was concentrated, health and finance. We summarize what has been learned so far in these domains and suggest promising venues for future research. We conclude that it is important to conduct interventions to improve numeracy in less numerate individuals and to help them make informed decisions and achieve better life outcomes.

Does mental number line training work? The effects of cognitive training on real-life mathematics, numeracy, and decision making.

We developed and validated intervention aimed at enhancing numeracy (the ability to understand and use the concept of probability and statistical information) and decision making. One hundred and twenty-two participants were randomly assigned to a Mental Number Line Training condition (MNLT) or an Arithmetic Training Active Control condition (ATAC). Response mode (a slider anchored within the current response range vs. a numerical keyboard) was the only, and essential, difference between experimental conditions. After MNLT, participants developed a more precise mapping of numbers onto the mental number line. However, the results regarding the transfer of this effect to performance in other cognitive tasks were mixed. We observed the transfer to an ability to quickly estimate the sum of numerical quantities (measured by the precision of estimates for the total price of everyday products), but we did not find evidence that MNLT, as compared to the control condition, improved performance on numerical competencies measures or decision-making tasks. Interestingly, we found that both MNLT and ATAC resulted in higher subjective numeracy as well as normatively better financial decisions, and valuation of risky prospects. Developing more exact symbolic-number mapping may be a promising direction of future research on improving decision making skills. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Numeracy and risk literacy: what have we learned so far?

Numerical skills are essential to make informed decisions in our daily life. Unfortunately, many people lack basic numeracy, which limits their ability to accurately interpret risks (i.e., risk literacy). In this paper, we provide an overview of research investigating the role of numeracy in two prominent domains, where most research was concentrated, health and finance. We summarize what has been learned so far in these domains and suggest promising venues for future research. We conclude that it is important to conduct interventions to improve numeracy in less numerate individuals and to help them make informed decisions and achieve better life outcomes

No disponible

Does Fear Increase Search Effort in More Numerate People? An Experimental Study Investigating Information Acquisition in a Decision From Experience Task.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of numeracy and the emotion of fear on the decision-making process. While previous research demonstrated that these factors are independently related to search effort, search policy and choice in a decision from experience task, less is known about how their interaction contributes to processing information under uncertainty. We attempted to address this problem and to fill this gap. In the present study, we hypothesized that more numerate people would sample more information about a decision problem and that the effect of fear would depend on the source of this emotion: whether it is integral (i.e., relevant) or incidental (i.e., irrelevant) to a decision problem. Additionally, we tested how these factors predict choices. We addressed these hypotheses in a series of two experiments. In each experiment, we used a sampling paradigm to measure search effort, search policy and choice in nine binary problems included in a decision from experience task. In Experiment 1, before the sampling task we elicited incidental fear by asking participants to recall fearful events from their life. In Experiment 2, integral fear was elicited by asking participants to make choices concerning medical treatment. Decision problems and their payoff distributions were the same in the two experiments and across each condition. In both experiments, we assessed objective statistical numeracy and controlled for a change in the current emotional state. We found that more numerate people sampled more information about a decision problem and switched less frequently between alternatives. Incidental fear marginally predicted search effort. Integral fear led to larger sample sizes, but only among more numerate people. Neither numeracy nor fear were related to the number of choices that maximized expected values. However, across two experiments sample sizes predicted the number of choices that maximized experienced mean returns. The findings suggest that people with higher numeracy may be more sensitive to integral emotions; this may result in more effortful sampling of relevant information leading to choices maximizing experienced returns.

The Affective Bases of Risk Perception: Negative Feelings and Stress Mediate the Relationship between Mental Imagery and Risk Perception.

Recent research has documented that affect plays a crucial role in risk perception. When no information about numerical risk estimates is available (e.g., probability of loss or magnitude of consequences), people may rely on positive and negative affect toward perceived risk. However, determinants of affective reactions to risks are poorly understood. In a series of three experiments, we addressed the question of whether and to what degree mental imagery eliciting negative affect and stress influences risk perception. In each experiment, participants were instructed to visualize consequences of risk taking and to rate riskiness. In Experiment 1, participants who imagined negative risk consequences reported more negative affect and perceived risk as higher compared to the control condition. In Experiment 2, we found that this effect was driven by affect elicited by mental imagery rather than its vividness and intensity. In this study, imagining positive risk consequences led to lower perceived risk than visualizing negative risk consequences. Finally, we tested the hypothesis that negative affect related to higher perceived risk was caused by negative feelings of stress. In Experiment 3, we introduced risk-irrelevant stress to show that participants in the stress condition rated perceived risk as higher in comparison to the control condition. This experiment showed that higher ratings of perceived risk were influenced by psychological stress. Taken together, our results demonstrate that affect-laden mental imagery dramatically changes risk perception through negative affect (i.e., psychological stress).

Affect-laden imagery and risk taking: the mediating role of stress and risk perception.

This paper investigates how affect-laden imagery that evokes emotional stress influences risk perception and risk taking in real-life scenarios. In a series of three studies, we instructed participants to imagine the consequences of risky scenarios and then rate the intensity of the experienced stress, perceived risk and their willingness to engage in risky behavior. Study 1 showed that people spontaneously imagine negative rather than positive risk consequences, which are directly related to their lower willingness to take risk. Moreover, this relationship was mediated by feelings of stress and risk perception. Study 2 replicated and extended these findings by showing that imagining negative risk consequences evokes psychophysiological stress responses observed in elevated blood pressure. Finally, in Study 3, we once again demonstrated that a higher intensity of mental images of negative risk consequences, as measured by enhanced brain activity in the parieto-occipital lobes, leads to a lower propensity to take risk. Furthermore, individual differences in creating vivid and intense negative images of risk consequences moderated the strength of the relationship between risk perception and risk taking. Participants who created more vivid and intense images of negative risk consequences paid less attention to the assessments of riskiness in rating their likelihood to take risk. To summarize, we showed that feelings of emotional stress and perceived riskiness mediate the relationship between mental imagery and risk taking, whereas individual differences in abilities to create vivid mental images may influence the degree to which more cognitive risk assessments are used in the risk-taking process.