IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v38y2018i10p2128-2143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Subjective Probabilities: The Effect of Response Mode on the Use of Focal Responses, Validity, and Respondents’ Evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Wändi Bruine de Bruin
  • Katherine G. Carman

Abstract

Subjective probabilities are central to risk assessment, decision making, and risk communication efforts. Surveys measuring probability judgments have traditionally used open‐ended response modes, asking participants to generate a response between 0% and 100%. A typical finding is the seemingly excessive use of 50%, perhaps as an expression of “I don't know.” In an online survey with a nationally representative sample of the Dutch population, we examined the effect of response modes on the use of 50% and other focal responses, predictive validity, and respondents’ survey evaluations. Respondents assessed the probability of dying, getting the flu, and experiencing other health‐related events. They were randomly assigned to a traditional open‐ended response mode, a visual linear scale ranging from 0% to 100%, or a version of that visual linear scale on which a magnifier emerged after clicking on it. We found that, compared to the open‐ended response mode, the visual linear and magnifier scale each reduced the use of 50%, 0%, and 100% responses, especially among respondents with low numeracy. Responses given with each response mode were valid, in terms of significant correlations with health behavior and outcomes. Where differences emerged, the visual scales seemed to have slightly better validity than the open‐ended response mode. Both high‐numerate and low‐numerate respondents’ evaluations of the surveys were highest for the visual linear scale. Our results have implications for subjective probability elicitation and survey design.

Suggested Citation

  • Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Katherine G. Carman, 2018. "Measuring Subjective Probabilities: The Effect of Response Mode on the Use of Focal Responses, Validity, and Respondents’ Evaluations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(10), pages 2128-2143, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:10:p:2128-2143
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.13138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13138
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.13138?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alycia Chin & Wändi Bruine de Bruin, 2018. "Eliciting Stock Market Expectations: The Effects of Question Wording on Survey Experience and Response Validity," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 101-110, January.
    2. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Julie S. Downs & Pamela Murray & Baruch Fischhoff, 2010. "Can Female Adolescents Tell Whether They Will Test Positive for Chlamydia Infection?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(2), pages 189-193, March.
    3. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Andrew Parker & Jürgen Maurer, 2011. "Assessing small non-zero perceptions of chance: The case of H1N1 (swine) flu risks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 145-159, April.
    4. Michael D. Hurd & Kathleen McGarry, 1995. "Evaluation of the Subjective Probabilities of Survival in the Health and Retirement Study," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30, pages 268-292.
    5. 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.
    6. Steven Woloshin & Lisa M. Schwartz & Stephanie Byram & Baruch Fischhoff & H. Gilbert Welch, 2000. "A New Scale for Assessing Perceptions of Chance," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 20(3), pages 298-307, July.
    7. F. Thomas Juster, 1966. "Consumer Buying Intentions and Purchase Probability: An Experiment in Survey Design," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number just66-2, March.
    8. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Paul S. Fischbeck & Neil A. Stiber & Baruch Fischhoff, 2002. "What Number is “Fifty‐Fifty”?: Redistributing Excessive 50% Responses in Elicited Probabilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 713-723, August.
    9. Michael D. Hurd & Kathleen McGarry, 2002. "The Predictive Validity of Subjective Probabilities of Survival," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(482), pages 966-985, October.
    10. Katherine Carman & Peter Kooreman, 2014. "Probability perceptions and preventive health care," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 43-71, August.
    11. Michael D. Hurd, 2009. "Subjective Probabilities in Household Surveys," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 543-564, May.
    12. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Katherine G. Carman, 2012. "Measuring Risk Perceptions," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(2), pages 232-236, March.
    13. Ahmed Khwaja & Frank Sloan & Sukyung Chung, 2007. "The relationship between individual expectations and behaviors: Mortality expectations and smoking decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 179-201, October.
    14. Manski, Charles F. & Molinari, Francesca, 2010. "Rounding Probabilistic Expectations in Surveys," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 28(2), pages 219-231.
    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. Giustinelli, Pamela & Manski, Charles F. & Molinari, Francesca, 2022. "Tail and center rounding of probabilistic expectations in the Health and Retirement Study," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 265-281.
    2. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Htay-Wah Saw & Dana P. Goldman, 2020. "Political polarization in US residents’ COVID-19 risk perceptions, policy preferences, and protective behaviors," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 177-194, October.
    3. Boneva, Teodora & Golin, Marta & Rauh, Christopher, 2022. "Can perceived returns explain enrollment gaps in postgraduate education?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Conti, G.; & Giustinelli, P.;, 2022. "For Better or Worse? Subjective Expectations and Cost-Benefit Trade-Offs in Health Behavior: An Application to Lockdown Compliance in the United Kingdom," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 22/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    5. Bruine de Bruin, Wändi & Carman, Katherine G. & Parker, Andrew M., 2021. "Mental associations with COVID-19 and how they relate with self-reported protective behaviors: A national survey in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    6. Nowak, Sarah A. & Parker, Andrew M. & Gidengil, Courtney A. & Richardson, Andrea S. & Walsh, Matthew M. & Kennedy, David P. & Vardavas, Raffaele, 2022. "Reciprocal relationships among influenza experiences, perceptions, and behavior: Results from a national, longitudinal survey of United States adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    7. Fabrice Kämpfen & Iliana V Kohler & Alberto Ciancio & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Jürgen Maurer & Hans-Peter Kohler, 2020. "Predictors of mental health during the Covid-19 pandemic in the US: Role of economic concerns, health worries and social distancing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-13, November.

    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. Katherine Carman & Peter Kooreman, 2014. "Probability perceptions and preventive health care," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 43-71, August.
    2. de Bresser, Jochem, 2019. "Measuring Subjective Survival Expectations : Do Response Scales Matter?," Other publications TiSEM 53bc2ec3-4126-4dfb-81f3-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. de Bresser, Jochem, 2019. "Measuring subjective survival expectations – Do response scales matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 136-156.
    4. Joachim Winter & Amelie Wuppermann, 2014. "Do They Know What Is At Risk? Health Risk Perception Among The Obese," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(5), pages 564-585, May.
    5. Kettlewell, Nathan, 2020. "Subjective Expectations for Health Service Use and Consequences for Health Insurance Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 13445, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Nils Grevenbrock & Max Groneck & Alexander Ludwig & Alexander Zimper, 2021. "Cognition, Optimism, And The Formation Of Age‐Dependent Survival Beliefs," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(2), pages 887-918, May.
    7. Andrew Caplin, 2017. "Comment on "Survey Measurement of Probabilistic Economic Expectations: Progress and Promise"," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2017, volume 32, pages 472-478, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Wu, Shang & Stevens, Ralph & Thorp, Susan, 2015. "Cohort and target age effects on subjective survival probabilities: Implications for models of the retirement phase," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 39-56.
    9. Joan Costa-Font & Cristina Vilaplana-Prieto, 2022. "Biased survival expectations and behaviours: Does domain specific information matter?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 285-317, December.
    10. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Andrew Parker & Jürgen Maurer, 2011. "Assessing small non-zero perceptions of chance: The case of H1N1 (swine) flu risks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 145-159, April.
    11. de Bresser, Jochem, 2016. "Test-Retest Reliability of Subjective Survival Expectations," Other publications TiSEM dfd6074d-31ae-4ecb-be25-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Vesile Kutlu-Koc & Adriaan Kalwij, 2017. "Individual Survival Expectations and Actual Mortality: Evidence from Dutch Survey and Administrative Data," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 33(4), pages 509-532, October.
    13. Dickie, Mark & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Gerking, Shelby & Veronesi, Marcella, 2022. "Risk Perception, Learning, and Willingness to Pay to Reduce Heart Disease Risk," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 363-382, October.
    14. de Bresser, Jochem, 2021. "Evaluating the Accuracy of Counterfactuals The Role of Heterogeneous Expectations in Life Cycle Models," Other publications TiSEM a7e2b4d8-fed0-4e86-926f-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Huynh, Kim P. & Jung, Juergen, 2015. "Subjective health expectations," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 693-711.
    16. Giustinelli, Pamela & Manski, Charles F. & Molinari, Francesca, 2022. "Tail and center rounding of probabilistic expectations in the Health and Retirement Study," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 265-281.
    17. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Esen Erdogan Ciftci & Owen O'Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2015. "Who can predict their Own Demise? Accuracy of Longevity Expectations by Education and Cognition," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-052/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    18. de Bresser, Jochem, 2021. "Evaluating the Accuracy of Counterfactuals The Role of Heterogeneous Expectations in Life Cycle Models," Discussion Paper 2021-034, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    19. Luc Bissonnette & Michael D. Hurd & Pierre‐Carl Michaud, 2017. "Individual survival curves comparing subjective and observed mortality risks," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(12), pages 285-303, December.
    20. Péter Hudomiet & Robert J. Willis, 2013. "Estimating Second Order Probability Beliefs from Subjective Survival Data," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 152-170, June.

    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:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:10:p:2128-2143. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.