IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v15y2020i2p203-213_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interpreting politically-charged numerical information: The influence of numeracy and problem difficulty on response accuracy

Author

Listed:
  • Baker, S. Glenn
  • Patel, Niraj
  • Gunten, Curtis Von
  • Valentine, K. D.
  • Scherer, Laura D.

Abstract

People who possess greater mathematical skills (i.e., numeracy) are generally more accurate in interpreting numerical data than less numerate people. However, recent evidence has suggested that more numerate people may use their numerical skills to interpret data only if their initial interpretation conflicts with their worldview. That is, if an initial, intuitive (but incorrect) interpretation of data appears to disconfirm one’s beliefs, then numerical skills are used to further process the data and reach the correct interpretation, whereas numerical skills are not used in situations where an initial incorrect interpretation of the data appears to confirm one’s beliefs (i.e., motivated numeracy). In the present study, participants were presented with several data problems, some with correct answers confirming their political views and other disconfirming their views. The difficulty of these problems was manipulated to examine how numeracy would influence the rate of correct responses on easier vs. more difficult problems. Results indicated that participants were more likely to answer problems correctly if the correct answer confirmed rather than disconfirmed their political views, and this response pattern did not depend on problem difficulty or numerical skill. Although more numerate participants were more accurate overall, this was true both for problems in which the correct answer confirmed and disconfirmed participants’ political views.

Suggested Citation

  • Baker, S. Glenn & Patel, Niraj & Gunten, Curtis Von & Valentine, K. D. & Scherer, Laura D., 2020. "Interpreting politically-charged numerical information: The influence of numeracy and problem difficulty on response accuracy," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 203-213, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:2:p:203-213_5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S193029750000735X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:2:p:203-213_5. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.