IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v121y2013i1p41-52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Additivity neglect in probability estimates: Effects of numeracy and response format

Author

Listed:
  • Riege, Anine H.
  • Teigen, Karl Halvor

Abstract

When people are asked to estimate the probabilities for an exhaustive set of more than two events, they often produce probabilities that add up to more than 100%. Potential determinants for such additivity neglect are explored in four experiments. Additive responses vary between experimental conditions, mainly as a result of response format, with a scale format leading to fewer additive responses than a list format with self-generated, written probabilities. Participants with high numeracy scores produced more additive responses, especially after being primed with a numeracy scale. Additivity neglect for 100% sums appears to be unrelated to other subadditive judgments, like non-additive disjunctions. We conclude that additivity neglect is caused by a case-based approach, which comes natural in real-life situations where the full set of outcomes is not available.

Suggested Citation

  • Riege, Anine H. & Teigen, Karl Halvor, 2013. "Additivity neglect in probability estimates: Effects of numeracy and response format," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 41-52.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:121:y:2013:i:1:p:41-52
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.11.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597812001288
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.11.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klayman, Joshua & Soll, Jack B. & Gonzalez-Vallejo, Claudia & Barlas, Sema, 1999. "Overconfidence: It Depends on How, What, and Whom You Ask, , , , , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 216-247, September.
    2. Michael Theil, 2002. "The role of translations of verbal into numerical probability expressions in risk management: a meta-analysis," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 177-186, April.
    3. Teigen, Karl Halvor, 2001. "When Equal Chances = Good Chances: Verbal Probabilities and the Equiprobability Effect," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 77-108, May.
    4. Craig R. Fox & Robert T. Clemen, 2005. "Subjective Probability Assessment in Decision Analysis: Partition Dependence and Bias Toward the Ignorance Prior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(9), pages 1417-1432, September.
    5. Brun, Wibecke & Teigen, Karl Halvor, 1988. "Verbal probabilities: Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 390-404, June.
    6. Wändi Bruine De Bruin & Charles F. Manski & Giorgio Topa & Wilbert van der Klaauw, 2011. "Measuring consumer uncertainty about future inflation," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 454-478, April.
    7. Donald A. Redelmeier & Derek J. Koehler & Varda Liberman & Amos Tversky, 1995. "Probability Judgment in Medicine," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 15(3), pages 227-230, August.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:7:p:467-476 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i:6:p:435-448 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:34-40 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Isaac M. Lipkus & Greg Samsa & Barbara K. Rimer, 2001. "General Performance on a Numeracy Scale among Highly Educated Samples," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(1), pages 37-44, February.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:20-33 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Yamagishi, Kimihiko, 2002. "Proximity, Compatibility, and Noncomplementarity in Subjective Probability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 136-155, January.
    14. Craig R. Fox & Amos Tversky, 1998. "A Belief-Based Account of Decision Under Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(7), pages 879-895, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marie Juanchich & Miroslav Sirota, 2016. "How to improve people's interpretation of probabilities of precipitation," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 388-404, March.
    2. Teigen, Karl Halvor & Juanchich, Marie & Løhre, Erik, 2022. "What is a “likely” amount? Representative (modal) values are considered likely even when their probabilities are low," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. Gro Hege Haraldsen Nordbye & Karl Halvor Teigen, 2014. "Responsibility judgments of wins and losses in the 2013 chess championship," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(4), pages 335-348, July.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:1:p:15-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:7-20 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Saima Ghazal & Edward T. Cokely & Rocio Garcia-Retamero, 2014. "Predicting biases in very highly educated samples: Numeracy and metacognition," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(1), pages 15-34, January.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:4:p:335-348 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Shai Davidai & Thomas Gilovich, 2016. "The tide that lifts all focal boats: Asymmetric predictions of ascent and descent in rankings," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(1), pages 7-20, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Tannenbaum & Craig R. Fox & Gülden Ülkümen, 2017. "Judgment Extremity and Accuracy Under Epistemic vs. Aleatory Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 497-518, February.
    2. Teigen, Karl Halvor & Juanchich, Marie & Løhre, Erik, 2022. "What is a “likely” amount? Representative (modal) values are considered likely even when their probabilities are low," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. David Tannenbaum & Craig R. Fox & Gülden Ülkümen, 2017. "Judgment Extremity and Accuracy Under Epistemic vs. Aleatory Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 497-518, February.
    4. Brenner, Lyle & Griffin, Dale & Koehler, Derek J., 2005. "Modeling patterns of probability calibration with random support theory: Diagnosing case-based judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 64-81, May.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:6:p:683-695 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Olivier Armantier & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Giorgio Topa & Wilbert van der Klaauw & Basit Zafar, 2015. "Inflation Expectations And Behavior: Do Survey Respondents Act On Their Beliefs?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(2), pages 505-536, May.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:363-393 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:330-344 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Enrico Diecidue & Dolchai La-ornual, 2009. "Reconciling support theory and the book-making principle," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 173-190, June.
    10. Daniel J. Walters & Philip M. Fernbach & Craig R. Fox & Steven A. Sloman, 2017. "Known Unknowns: A Critical Determinant of Confidence and Calibration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4298-4307, December.
    11. Haran, Uriel & Mazar, Asaf & Hurwitz, Mordechai & Moran, Simone, 2022. "Confidently at your service: Advisors alter their stated confidence to be helpful," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    12. David R. Mandel & Daniel Irwin, 2021. "Facilitating sender-receiver agreement in communicated probabilities: Is it best to use words, numbers or both?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 363-393, March.
    13. Aurélien Baillon, 2008. "Eliciting Subjective Probabilities Through Exchangeable Events: An Advantage and a Limitation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 76-87, June.
    14. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    15. Marie Juanchich & Karl Halvor Teigen & Am'elie Gourdon, 2013. "Top scores are possible, bottom scores are certain (and middle scores are not worth mentioning): A pragmatic view of verbal probabilities," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(3), pages 345-364, May.
    16. Robert N. Collins & David R. Mandel, 2019. "Cultivating credibility with probability words and numbers," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(6), pages 683-695, November.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:345-364 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Luke F. Rinne & Michele M. M. Mazzocco, 2013. "Inferring uncertainty from interval estimates: Effects of alpha level and numeracy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(3), pages 330-344, May.
    19. Kriti Jain & Kanchan Mukherjee & J. Neil Bearden & Anil Gaba, 2013. "Unpacking the Future: A Nudge Toward Wider Subjective Confidence Intervals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 1970-1987, September.
    20. Zimmer, Anja & Schade, Christian & Gründl, Helmut, 2009. "Is default risk acceptable when purchasing insurance? Experimental evidence for different probability representations, reasons for default, and framings," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 11-23, February.
    21. Robert T. Clemen & Canan Ulu, 2008. "Interior Additivity and Subjective Probability Assessment of Continuous Variables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 835-851, April.
    22. Thunström, Linda & Nordström, Jonas & Shogren, Jason F., 2015. "Certainty and overconfidence in future preferences for food," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 101-113.
    23. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    24. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:34-40 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Fuchsman, Dillon & McGee, Josh B. & Zamarro, Gema, 2023. "Teachers’ willingness to pay for retirement benefits: A national stated preferences experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:121:y:2013:i:1:p:41-52. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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.