{"title":"适应性的条件性:探究算术能力与适应性行为之间的关系","authors":"Supratik Mondal, Jakub Traczyk","doi":"10.1016/j.joep.2023.102611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Recent studies have illustrated that individuals with higher numeracy are more likely to make adaptive choices than individuals with lower numeracy. Highly numerate individuals can consistently make normatively superior choices by maximizing expected value (EV) in meaningful choice problems (high-payoff condition). However, in trivial problems (low-payoff condition), they can also adaptively change their strategy to make good enough choices and not follow a normatively superior strategy. Upon inspection of choice problems used in earlier studies, it was revealed that payoff was not the only varying factor between the two payoff conditions. Therefore, it is unclear whether payoff conditions alone can provide sufficient context for adaptive modulation in decision strategy. In two pre-registered studies (N = 343), we tested numerate individuals’ adaptiveness under high- and low-payoff conditions addressing the limitations of earlier studies. Results revealed that the presence of two payoff conditions together did not initiate adaptive strategy selection, regardless of participants’ numeracy. Instead, numerate individuals, compared to less numerate individuals, consistently made more EV-consistent choices in both payoff conditions. We identified that the change in EV consistency across payoff conditions was influenced more by the absolute difference than the relative difference in the expected reward.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48318,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conditionality of adaptiveness: Investigating the relationship between numeracy and adaptive behavior\",\"authors\":\"Supratik Mondal, Jakub Traczyk\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.joep.2023.102611\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Recent studies have illustrated that individuals with higher numeracy are more likely to make adaptive choices than individuals with lower numeracy. Highly numerate individuals can consistently make normatively superior choices by maximizing expected value (EV) in meaningful choice problems (high-payoff condition). However, in trivial problems (low-payoff condition), they can also adaptively change their strategy to make good enough choices and not follow a normatively superior strategy. Upon inspection of choice problems used in earlier studies, it was revealed that payoff was not the only varying factor between the two payoff conditions. Therefore, it is unclear whether payoff conditions alone can provide sufficient context for adaptive modulation in decision strategy. In two pre-registered studies (N = 343), we tested numerate individuals’ adaptiveness under high- and low-payoff conditions addressing the limitations of earlier studies. Results revealed that the presence of two payoff conditions together did not initiate adaptive strategy selection, regardless of participants’ numeracy. Instead, numerate individuals, compared to less numerate individuals, consistently made more EV-consistent choices in both payoff conditions. We identified that the change in EV consistency across payoff conditions was influenced more by the absolute difference than the relative difference in the expected reward.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487023000120\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487023000120","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Conditionality of adaptiveness: Investigating the relationship between numeracy and adaptive behavior
Recent studies have illustrated that individuals with higher numeracy are more likely to make adaptive choices than individuals with lower numeracy. Highly numerate individuals can consistently make normatively superior choices by maximizing expected value (EV) in meaningful choice problems (high-payoff condition). However, in trivial problems (low-payoff condition), they can also adaptively change their strategy to make good enough choices and not follow a normatively superior strategy. Upon inspection of choice problems used in earlier studies, it was revealed that payoff was not the only varying factor between the two payoff conditions. Therefore, it is unclear whether payoff conditions alone can provide sufficient context for adaptive modulation in decision strategy. In two pre-registered studies (N = 343), we tested numerate individuals’ adaptiveness under high- and low-payoff conditions addressing the limitations of earlier studies. Results revealed that the presence of two payoff conditions together did not initiate adaptive strategy selection, regardless of participants’ numeracy. Instead, numerate individuals, compared to less numerate individuals, consistently made more EV-consistent choices in both payoff conditions. We identified that the change in EV consistency across payoff conditions was influenced more by the absolute difference than the relative difference in the expected reward.
期刊介绍:
The Journal aims to present research that will improve understanding of behavioral, in particular psychological, aspects of economic phenomena and processes. The Journal seeks to be a channel for the increased interest in using behavioral science methods for the study of economic behavior, and so to contribute to better solutions of societal problems, by stimulating new approaches and new theorizing about economic affairs. Economic psychology as a discipline studies the psychological mechanisms that underlie economic behavior. It deals with preferences, judgments, choices, economic interaction, and factors influencing these, as well as the consequences of judgements and decisions for economic processes and phenomena. This includes the impact of economic institutions upon human behavior and well-being. Studies in economic psychology may relate to different levels of aggregation, from the household and the individual consumer to the macro level of whole nations. Economic behavior in connection with inflation, unemployment, taxation, economic development, as well as consumer information and economic behavior in the market place are thus among the fields of interest. The journal also encourages submissions dealing with social interaction in economic contexts, like bargaining, negotiation, or group decision-making. The Journal of Economic Psychology contains: (a) novel reports of empirical (including: experimental) research on economic behavior; (b) replications studies; (c) assessments of the state of the art in economic psychology; (d) articles providing a theoretical perspective or a frame of reference for the study of economic behavior; (e) articles explaining the implications of theoretical developments for practical applications; (f) book reviews; (g) announcements of meetings, conferences and seminars.