Risk approximation in decision making: approximative numeric abilities predict advantageous decisions under objective risk
- 197 Downloads
Many decision situations in everyday life involve mathematical considerations. In decisions under objective risk, i.e., when explicit numeric information is available, executive functions and abilities to handle exact numbers and ratios are predictors of objectively advantageous choices. Although still debated, exact numeric abilities, e.g., normative calculation skills, are assumed to be related to approximate number processing skills. The current study investigates the effects of approximative numeric abilities on decision making under objective risk. Participants (N = 153) performed a paradigm measuring number-comparison, quantity-estimation, risk-estimation, and decision-making skills on the basis of rapid dot comparisons. Additionally, a risky decision-making task with exact numeric information was administered, as well as tasks measuring executive functions and exact numeric abilities, e.g., mental calculation and ratio processing skills, were conducted. Approximative numeric abilities significantly predicted advantageous decision making, even beyond the effects of executive functions and exact numeric skills. Especially being able to make accurate risk estimations seemed to contribute to superior choices. We recommend approximation skills and approximate number processing to be subject of future investigations on decision making under risk.
KeywordsDecision making Approximate number system Risk estimation Ratio processing Numeracy
We like to especially thank Christina Gallinger for her help with data acquisition.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Human and animal rights
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
- Brand M, Fujiwara E, Borsutzky S, Kalbe E, Kessler J, Markowitsch HJ (2005a) Decision-making deficits of korsakoff patients in a new gambling task with explicit rules: associations with executive functions. Neuropsychology 19(3):267–277. https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-418.104.22.1687 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Brand M, Recknor EC, Grabenhorst F, Bechara A (2007) Decisions under ambiguity and decisions under risk: correlations with executive functions and comparisons of two different gambling tasks with implicit and explicit rules. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 29(1):86–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390500507196 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Brand M, Schiebener J, Pertl M-T, Delazer M (2014) Know the risk, take the win: how executive functions and probability processing influence advantageous decision making under risk conditions. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 36(9):914–929. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2014.955783 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences—the effect size. Erlbaum, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
- Cokely ET, Kelley CM (2009) Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk: a protocol analysis and process model evaluation. Judgm Decis Mak 4(1):20–33Google Scholar
- De Smedt B, Noël M-P, Gilmore C, Ansari D (2013a) How do symbolic and non-symbolic numerical magnitude processing skills relate to individual differences in children’s mathematical skills? A review of evidence from brain and behavior. Trends Neurosci Educ 2(2):48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2013.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- De Smedt B, Noël M-P, Gilmore C, Ansari D (2013b) The relationship between symbolic and non-symbolic numerical magnitude processing skills and the typical and atypical development of mathematics: a review of evidence from brain and behavior. Trends Neurosci Educ 2:48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2013.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dehaene S (1997) The number sense: how the mind creates mathematics. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Donati MA, Panno A, Chiesi F, Primi C (2014) A mediation model to explain decision making under conditions of risk among adolescents: the role of fluid intelligence and probabilistic reasoning. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 36(6):588–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2014.918091 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Epstein S (2003) Cognitive-experiential self-theory of personality. In: Millon T, Lerner MJ (eds) Handbook of Psychology, vol 5. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 159–184Google Scholar
- Gilmore C, Attridge N, Clayton S, Cragg L, Johnson S, Marlow N, Inglis M (2013) Individual differences in inhibitory control, not non-verbal number acuity, correlate with mathematics achievement. PLoS ONE 8(6):e67374. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067374 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Keller C, Kreuzmair C, Leins-Hess R, Siegrist M (2014) Numeric and graphic risk information processing of high and low numerates in the intuitive and deliberative decision modes: an eye-tracker study. Judgm Decis Mak 9(5):420–432Google Scholar
- Peters E, Levin IP (2008) Dissecting the risky-choice framing effect: numeracy as an individual-difference factor in weighting risky and riskless options. Judgm Decis Mak 3(6):435–448Google Scholar
- Peters E, Slovic P, Västfjäll D, Mertz C (2008) Intuitive numbers guide decisions. Judgm Decis Mak 3(8):619–635Google Scholar
- Price GR, Palmer D, Battista C, Ansari D (2012) Nonsymbolic numerical magnitude comparison: reliability and validity of different task variants and outcome measures, and their relationship to arithmetic achievement in adults. Acta Physiol 140(1):50–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.02.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Revkin SK, Piazza M, Izard V, Zamarian L, Karner E, Delazer M (2008) Verbal numerosity estimation deficit in the context of spared semantic representation of numbers: a neuropsychological study of a patient with frontal lesions. Neuropsychologia 46(10):2463–2475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.04.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schiebener J, Zamarian L, Delazer M, Brand M (2011) Executive functions, categorization of probabilities, and learning from feedback: what does really matter for decision making under explicit risk conditions? J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 33(9):1025–1039. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2011.595702 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schiebener J, Wegmann E, Gathmann B, Laier C, Pawlikowski M, Brand M (2014) Among three different executive functions, general executive control ability is a key predictor of decision making under objective risk. Front Psychol 5(1386):1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01386 CrossRefGoogle Scholar