Measuring reaction times to number comparisons is thought to reveal a processing stage in elementary numerical cognition linked to internal, imprecise representations of number magnitudes. These intuitive representations of the mental number line have been demonstrated across species and human development but have been little explored in decision making. This paper develops and tests hypotheses about the influence of such evolutionarily ancient, intuitive numbers on human decisions. We demonstrate that individuals with more precise mental-number-line representations are higher in numeracy (number skills) consistent with previous research with children. Individuals with more precise representations (compared to those with less precise representations) also were more likely to choose larger, later amounts over smaller, immediate amounts, particularly with a larger proportional difference between the two monetary outcomes. In addition, they were more likely to choose an option with a larger proportional but smaller absolute difference compared to those with less precise representations. These results are consistent with intuitive number representations underlying: a) perceived differences between numbers, b) the extent to which proportional differences are weighed in decisions, and, ultimately, c) the valuation of decision options. Human decision processes involving numbers important to health and financial matters may be rooted in elementary, biological processes shared with other species.
The Generic Conspiracist Beliefs Scale (GCB-15) is a reliable and valid measure of conspiracist ideation, but it is also inefficient. At 15 items, the GCB-15 can take upwards of four minutes to complete, limiting its usefulness in situations where administration time and participant attention are limited. Here we introduce the GCB-5—a 5-item, short form of the GCB-15. Across five studies, we demonstrate that the GCB-5 is both a reliable and valid measure of conspiracist ideation. With respect to its reliability, we find consistent evidence that a single latent factor underlies the GCB-5 and accounts for a sizeable proportion of the variation in its items. With respect to its validity, we show that the GCB-5 is associated with both self- and informant-report measures of conspiracist beliefs, as well as with a multitude of theoretically relevant constructs, including anomie, fatalism, and delusional ideation. In the final study, we provide evidence that the GCB-5 is not only a reliable and valid measure but also one that has promise for addressing novel research questions. Specifically, we show that people high in conspiracist ideation—as assessed by the GCB-5—are more accepting of the use of nuclear weapons and other forms of so-called “virtuous violence” (e.g., the death penalty; anti-abortion legislation).
A recent public opinion survey (Harris, 1980) reported the following three results:...
: This was a study of cue utilization based on the correlational Lens Model. During training, 40 Ss learned how to use each of two independent numerical cues, separately, to predict a numerical criterion. One cue correlated .40 with the criterion; the other cue correlated .80 with the criterion. The Ss were trained to use scatter plots and regression lines to help them predict the criterion from the cue. Feedback of the true criterion value was given after every trial. Analysis of cue utilization was focused on the concept of conservatism, a concept borrowed from Bayesian studies of information processing. The Ss in this study were found to be conservative. The four groups did not differ in total accuracy but the successive-presentation groups showed an effect not found in the simultaneous-presentation groups: the first cue was used with greater conservatism than was the second cue. Thus it was shown that a concept of human information-processing inadequacy, conservatism, which was originally developed under one paradigm (Bayesian research), can be successfully translated to another paradigm (Lens Model research), to expand the generality of the concept. (Author)
The reliance on feelings when judging risks and benefits is one the most fundamental valuation processes in risk perception. While previous research suggest that the affect heuristic reliably predict an inverse correlation between risk and benefit judgments, it has not yet been tested if the affect heuristic is sensitive to elicitation method effects (joint/separate evaluation) and to what extend individual differences in cognitive abilities may mediate the risk-benefit correlation. Across two studies we find that 1) the risk-benefit correlation is stable across different elicitation methods and for different domains (e.g., social domain, thrill-seeking domain, health domain, economic domain etc.), and 2) the strength of the inverse correlation is tied to individual cognitive abilities - primarily cognitive reflection ability.
No abstract is provided for this article.
No abstract is provided for this article.
The world's most distinguished behavioral economists address the economic implications of catastrophe - how we must reconcile our instincts with a world full of natural disasters, global climate upheaval, financial storms and terrorist threats. We live in a risky world, one that requires us sometimes to make complicated, life-changing decisions often very quickly. The science of decision-making and adapting to changed circumstances is multi-disciplinary, but no area is more concerned with the rightness of how humans spend their resources and make their minds up than behavioral economics, the newly fashionable part of the economics curriculum. Here, leading thinkers and academics in this field, including three Nobel Prize winners, begin to show how we must reconcile our instincts with a world full of natural disasters, global climate upheaval, financial storms and terrorist threats. Of the 20 most costly insured catastrophes that occurred in the world in the past 38 years (1970-2007), half of them (ten events) have occurred since 2001, nine of them in the United States. For the US, which has extensive experience with natural catastrophes, the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons demonstrated the lack of adequate loss reduction measures and emergency preparedness capacity required to deal with large-scale natural disasters. Hurricane Katrina alone killed 1,300 people and forced 1.5 million people to evacuate the affected area - a historical record for the country. Economic damages are estimated in the range of US$150 to 200 billion. The 9/11 attacks and the 2004/2005 series of hurricanes that made the US landfall demonstrate a new scale of destruction. What is at stake here is the fundamental question of the affordability of living with risk, and the appropriate role of the public and private sectors in providing adequate coverage to the potential victims of future disasters. Contributors to the Irrational Economist Initiative are true pioneers and current leading thinkers on the question of catastrophe risk management. They have made critical contributions not only to the advancement of the knowledge in this field, but also in changing the ways decision makers in corporations and government bodies in the U.S. and other countries, address these questions, and the ways people living in high risk areas are affected.
“Baby boomers” comprise a significant portion of the U.S. population, and the leading-edge of this group will begin retirement within a decade. These individuals, in the age range of 45 to 55 years, are currently at or near the peak of their income-earning ability and are in a stage of life where retirement planning to meet future income needs is essential. This report presents the results of a national-level survey of leading-edge baby boomers and how they plan to meet their financial needs in retirement. Using a list-sample technique, 396 individuals in the age range 45 to 55 years were interviewed by telephone about their plans for retirement, the sources of wealth they have accumulated, the sources of income that they expect in retirement, and their perceptions about the future of the economy and financial markets. Health care costs appear to dominate people’s concerns and are the most important use to which they plan to put their accumulated wealth. Most individuals in this group expect to receive retirement income from multiple sources, including Social Security, employer pensions, work in retirement, and long-term investments in financial markets. The majority of individuals surveyed indicated that they have a personal portfolio of marketed securities. However, portfolio holders have much higher expectations of market performance and portfolio return than do professional financial advisors, in some cases twice as much on a ten-year average annualized basis. This optimism appears to be the result of several factors, including a buoyed sentiment about the long-term prospects for the domestic economy based on recent market performance, and a tendency toward establishing multiple income sources for retirement as a strategy for managing an uncertain future.
Zero is a special value in our daily lives, and previous research on how zero values affect decision making leaves many questions to be explored. The present research examined the zero effect in life-saving decisions and found that people expressed strong preferences for options offering a possibility that no one will die, even when the expected loss was relatively high. The prominence effect was proposed as one possible explanation, i.e., the notion that the option with possibly zero deaths is easy to defend and justify. Furthermore, we also found the zero effect in these life-saving decisions occurs only in loss framing rather than gain framing. We discuss the relationship between the zero effect, domain, framing, and evaluation mode.
In industrialized societies, the question “How safe is safe enough?” has emerged as a major policy issue of the 1980s. The frequent discovery of new hazards and the widespread publicity they receive is causing more and more individuals to see themselves...
As space scientists and engineers plan new missions to Mars and other plants in our solar system, they will face critical questions about the potential for biological contamination of planetary surfaces. In a society that places ever-increasing importance on the role of public involvement in science and technology policy, questions about risks of biological contamination will be examined and debated in the media, and will lead to the formation of public perceptions of planetary-contamination risks. These perceptions will, over time, form an important input to the development of space policy.
We as humans do not value lives consistently. While we are willing to act for one victim, we often become numb as the number of victims increases. The empathic ability to adopt others’ perspectives is essential for motivating help. However, the perspective-taking ability in our brains seems limited. Using functional MRI, we demonstrated that the core empathy network including the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) was more engaged for events happening to a single person than those happening to many people, no matter whether the events were emotionally neutral or negative. In particular, the perspective-taking-related mPFC showed greater and more extended activations for events about one person than those about many people. The mPFC may be the neural marker of why we feel indifferent to the suffering of large numbers of people in humanitarian disasters.
One of the fundamental questions addressed by risk-benefit analysis is “How safe is safe enough?” Chauncey Starr has proposed that economic dat
