Is there a description-experience gap in choices between a described and an experienced option?

Decision makers seem to evaluate risky options differently depending on the learning mode-that is, whether they learn about the options' payoff distributions from a summary description () or by drawing samples from them (). Are there also discrepancies when people choose between a described and an experienced option? In two experiments, we compared people's behavior in a condition with mixed learning modes (i.e.

The Lure of Beauty: People Select Representations of Statistical Information Largely Based on Attractiveness, Not Comprehensibility.

Objective: People differ in whether they understand graphical or numerical representations of statistical information better. However, assessing these skills is often not feasible when deciding which representation to select or use. This study investigates whether people choose the representation they understand better, whether this choice can improve risk comprehension, and whether results are influenced by participants' skills (graph literacy and numeracy).

How Do People Process Different Representations of Statistical Information? Insights into Cognitive Effort, Representational Inconsistencies, and Individual Differences.

Background: Graphical representation formats (e.g., icon arrays) have been shown to lead to better understanding of the benefits and risks of treatments compared to numbers.

Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample.

The study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem).

Revisiting the Open Sampling format: Improving risky choices through a novel graphical representation.

When making risky choices, people often fall short of the norm of expected value (EV) maximization. Previous research has shown that presenting options in the Open Sampling (OSa) format, a 10-by-10 matrix of randomly arranged outcomes, can improve choices and reduce decision times. First, the current research aims to replicate and extend the findings on the OSa format.

Subgroup Splits in Diverse Work Teams: Subgroup Perceptions but Not Demographic Faultlines Affect Team Identification and Emotional Exhaustion.

We investigate the relationship between (hypothetical) subgroup splits (i.e., faultlines), subjectively perceived subgroups, and team identification and emotional exhaustion.

When Does the Incremental Risk Format Aid Informed Medical Decisions? The Role of Learning, Feedback, and Number of Treatment Options.

Informed medical decisions require understanding the benefits and risks of treatments. This entails comparing treatment outcomes to a control group. The has been recommended as it directly visualizes the differences between treatment and control group in 1 graph, whereas they have to be calculated from 2 separate graphs in the .

The loss-bet paradox: Actuaries, accountants, and other numerate people rate numerically inferior gambles as superior.

Psychologists have convincingly demonstrated that preferences are not always stable and, instead, are often "constructed" based on information available in the judgment or decision context. In 4 studies with experts (accountants and actuaries in Studies 1 and 2, respectively) and a diverse lay population (Studies 3 and 4), the evidence was consistent with the highly numerate being more likely than the less numerate to construct their preferences by rating a numerically inferior bet as superior (i.e.