Submit a report

Announcements

Please note that we will be CLOSED to ALL SUBMISSIONS from 1 December 2024 through 12 January 2025 to give our recommenders and reviewers a holiday break.

We are recruiting recommenders (editors) from all research fields!

Your feedback matters! If you have authored or reviewed a Registered Report at Peer Community in Registered Reports, then please take 5 minutes to leave anonymous feedback about your experience, and view community ratings.

376

Revisiting the links between numeracy and decision making: Replication Registered Report of Peters et al. (2006) with an extension examining confidenceuse asterix (*) to get italics
Minrui Zhu, Gilad FeldmanPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2023
<p>Numeracy is individuals’ capacity to understand and process basic probability and numerical information required to make decisions. We conducted a Replication Registered Report of Peters et al. (2006) examining numeracy as a predictor of positive-negative framing effect (Study 1), frequency-percentage effect (Study 2), ratio effect (Study 3), and bets effect (Study 4). With an online US American Amazon Mechanical Turk sample (N = 860), our replication using the target’s dichotomizing of the numeracy measure found support for the original findings regarding interactions between numeracy and three decision-making effects. Numeracy was associated with weaker framing effect (η2p &nbsp;= 0.01, 90% CI [0.00, 0.02]), weaker ratio bias (Cramer’s V = 0.17, 95% CI [0.10, 0.24]), and stronger bets effect (η2p = 0.02, 90% CI [0.01, 0.04]), yet we found no support for the frequency-percentage effect (η2p = 0.00, 90% CI [0.00, 0.01]). However, we found support for associations with all four studies when treating numeracy as a continuous variable. We extended the replication to examine confidence, yet the results were &nbsp;mixed with support found for only three conditions (Study 1 positive framing condition: r = -0.11, 95% CI [-0.20, -0.02]; Study 3: r = 0.15, 95% CI [0.08, 0.21]; Study 4 no-loss bet condition: r = 0.10, 95% CI [0.01, 0.20]), suggesting a much weaker and more complex relationship than anticipated. Materials, data, and code are available on: https://osf.io/4hjck/.</p>
You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Numeracy, judgment and decision making, registered report, replication, framing effect, confidence
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Social sciences
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
2023-01-16 10:34:09
Chris Chambers