Authors
Paul D Windschitl, Gary L Wells
Publication date
1996/12
Journal
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
343
Publisher
American Psychological Association
Description
The authors argue that alternatives to the traditional numeric methods of measuring people's uncertainty may prove to hold important advantages under some conditions. In 3 experiments, the authors compared verbal measures involving responses such as very likely, and numeric measures involving responses such as 80% chance. The verbal measures were found to show more sensitivity to various manipulations affecting psychological uncertainty (Experiment 1), to be better predictors of individual preferences among options with unknown outcomes (Experiment 2), and to be better predictors of behavioral intentions (Experiment 3). Results suggest that numeric measures tend to elicit deliberate and rule-based reasoning from respondents, whereas verbal measures allow for more associative and intuitive thinking. Given that there may be many types of situations in which human decisions and behaviors are not …
Total citations
1996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023202422598991012611151813162419292521141621192426162412
Scholar articles
PD Windschitl, GL Wells - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1996