Literature DB >> 30114338

Measuring Subjective Probabilities: The Effect of Response Mode on the Use of Focal Responses, Validity, and Respondents' Evaluations.

Wändi Bruine de Bruin1,2, Katherine G Carman3.   

Abstract

Subjective probabilities are central to risk assessment, decision making, and risk communication efforts. Surveys measuring probability judgments have traditionally used open-ended response modes, asking participants to generate a response between 0% and 100%. A typical finding is the seemingly excessive use of 50%, perhaps as an expression of "I don't know." In an online survey with a nationally representative sample of the Dutch population, we examined the effect of response modes on the use of 50% and other focal responses, predictive validity, and respondents' survey evaluations. Respondents assessed the probability of dying, getting the flu, and experiencing other health-related events. They were randomly assigned to a traditional open-ended response mode, a visual linear scale ranging from 0% to 100%, or a version of that visual linear scale on which a magnifier emerged after clicking on it. We found that, compared to the open-ended response mode, the visual linear and magnifier scale each reduced the use of 50%, 0%, and 100% responses, especially among respondents with low numeracy. Responses given with each response mode were valid, in terms of significant correlations with health behavior and outcomes. Where differences emerged, the visual scales seemed to have slightly better validity than the open-ended response mode. Both high-numerate and low-numerate respondents' evaluations of the surveys were highest for the visual linear scale. Our results have implications for subjective probability elicitation and survey design.
© 2018 Society for Risk Analysis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Expectations; response mode; subjective probabilities

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30114338     DOI: 10.1111/risa.13138

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  6 in total

1.  Reports of social circles' and own vaccination behavior: A national longitudinal survey.

Authors:  Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Andrew M Parker; Mirta Galesic; Raffaele Vardavas
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 4.267

2.  Reciprocal relationships among influenza experiences, perceptions, and behavior: Results from a national, longitudinal survey of United States adults.

Authors:  Sarah A Nowak; Andrew M Parker; Courtney A Gidengil; Andrea S Richardson; Matthew M Walsh; David P Kennedy; Raffaele Vardavas
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  Tail and Center Rounding of Probabilistic Expectations in the Health and Retirement Study.

Authors:  Pamela Giustinelli; Charles F Manski; Francesca Molinari
Journal:  J Econom       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 3.363

4.  Political polarization in US residents' COVID-19 risk perceptions, policy preferences, and protective behaviors.

Authors:  Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Htay-Wah Saw; Dana P Goldman
Journal:  J Risk Uncertain       Date:  2020-11-18

5.  Association Between Risk Factors for Complications From COVID-19, Perceived Chances of Infection and Complications, and Protective Behavior in the US.

Authors:  Robert F Schoeni; Emily E Wiemers; Judith A Seltzer; Kenneth M Langa
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-03-01

6.  Predictors of mental health during the Covid-19 pandemic in the US: Role of economic concerns, health worries and social distancing.

Authors:  Fabrice Kämpfen; Iliana V Kohler; Alberto Ciancio; Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Jürgen Maurer; Hans-Peter Kohler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.