From group diffusion to ratio bias: Effects of denominator and numerator salience on intuitive risk and likelihood judgments
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2009, Vol 4, Issue 6
Abstract
The group-diffusion effect is the tendency for people to judge themselves to be less likely to experience a negative outcome as the total number of people exposed to the threat increases — even when the probability of the outcome is explicitly presented (Yamaguchi, 1998). In Experiment 1 we replicated this effect for two health threat scenarios using a variant of Yamaguchi’s original experimental paradigm. In Experiment 2, we showed that people also judge themselves to be less likely to be selected in a lottery as the number of people playing the lottery increases. In Experiment 3, we showed that explicitly presenting the number of people expected to be selected eliminates the group-diffusion effect, and in Experiment 4 we showed that presenting the number expected to be affected by a health threat without presenting the total number exposed to the threat produces a reverse effect. We propose, therefore, that the group-diffusion effect is related to the ratio bias. Both effects occur when people make risk or likelihood judgments based on information presented as a ratio. The difference is that the group-diffusion effect occurs when the denominator of the relevant ratio is more salient than the numerator, while the ratio bias occurs when the numerator is more salient than the denominator.
Authors and Affiliations
Paul C. Price and Teri V. Matthews
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677699
- DOI -
- Views 160
- Downloads 0
Divergence between individual perceptions and objective indicators of tail risks: Evidence from floodplain residents in New York City
This study provides the first comprehensive analysis of individual perceptions of tail risks. It focuses not only on the probability, as has been studied by Nicholas Barberis and others, but also on anticipation of damag...
A Bayesian latent mixture model approach to assessing performance in stock-flow reasoning
People often perform poorly on stock-flow reasoning tasks, with many (but not all) participants appearing to erroneously match the accumulation of the stock to the inflow – a response pattern attributed to the use of a “...
Strategies using recent feedback lead to matching or maximising behaviours
One challenge facing humans (and nonhuman animal) is that some options that appear attractive locally may not turn out best in the long run. To analyse this human learning problem, we explore human performance in a dynam...
Two sides of the same coin: Information processing style and reverse biases
This paper examines the effect of information processing styles (indexed by the Rational-Experiential Inventory of Pacini & Epstein, 1999) on adherence to bias judgments, and particularly to reverse biases; i.e., when tw...
DOSPERT+M: A survey of medical risk attitudes in the United States
Background: The Domain-Specific Risk Taking scale (DOSPERT) has been recommended as a tool for measuring risk attitudes in medical studies, but does not contain items specific to health care. Butler, et al. (2012) develo...