The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
“How Probable is Probable? A Numerical Translation of Verbal Probability Expressions.”
Abstract
Abstract The reported experiment took place in a professional forecasting organization accustomed to giving verbal probability assessments (‘likely’, ‘probable’, etc.). It attempts to highlight the communication problems caused by verbal probability expressions and to offer possible solutions that are compatible with the forecasters overall perspective on their jobs Experts in the organization were first asked to give a numerical translation to 30 different verbal probability expressions most of which were taken from the organization's own published political forecasts. In a second part of the experiment the experts were given 15 paragraphs selected from the organization's political publications each of which contained at least one verbal expression of probability. Subjects were again asked to give a numerical translation to each verbal probability expression The results indicate that (a) there is a high variability in the interpretation of verbal probability expressions and (b) the variability is even higher in context. Possible reasons for the context effect are discussed and practical implications are suggested.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“When analysts use terms like”
From The Value of Precision in Probability Assessment: Evidence from a Large-Scale Geopolitical Forecasting Tournament (2018) · cites this paper as Beyth-Merom 1982
Citations
Cites
Calibration of probabilities: the state of the art to 1980
Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1982) · Judgment under Uncertainty · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477.023 · Cited by 1,967
Empirical scaling of common verbal phrases associated with numerical probabilities
Lichtenstein, S., & Newman, J. R. (1967) · Psychonomic Science · doi:10.3758/bf03327890 · Cited by 313
Warner, J. (1968) · Journal of applied meteorology · doi:10.1175/1520-0450(1968)007 · Cited by 161
The specific meanings of certain terms indicating differing degrees of frequency
Simpson, R. H. (1944) · Quarterly Journal of Speech · doi:10.1080/00335634409381009 · Cited by 106
Value as a Determiner of Subjective Probability
Slovic, P. (1966) · IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics · doi:10.1109/thfe.1966.231980 · Cited by 78
Micrwave Maps of the Polar Ice of the Earth
Gloersen, P., Willicit, T. T., Chang, T., Nordberg, W., & Campbell, W. J. (1974) · Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society · doi:10.1175/1520-0477(1974)055 · Cited by 62
Stability in meanings for quantitative terms: A comparison over 20 years
Simpson, R. H. (1963) · Quarterly Journal of Speech · doi:10.1080/00335636309382600 · Cited by 58
Word usage and synonym representation in the English language.
Lepley, W. M., & Kobrick, J. L. (1952) · Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0059745 · Cited by 6
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Heuer R. J., 1978, Quantitative approaches to political intelligence: The CIA experience
- Raiffa H., 1968, Decision analysis
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–525 of 525
Rabagliati, H., & Srinivasan, M. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.20
Curtin, R. T. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9780511791598.012
A Comparison of Verbal and Numerical Judgements in the Analytic Hierarchy Process
Huizingh, K. R. E., & Vrolijk, H. C. J. (1996) · ISAHP proceedings · doi:10.13033/isahp.y1996.001
Alxatib, S., & Sauerland, U. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.24
(2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.002.0008
(2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.002.0004
(2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.002.0007
How Can We Get More Accurate: Recommendations About Human Judgment
Wilcox, J. E. (2022) · SpringerBriefs in psychology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-19205-0_8
Alekseev, A., Mingaleva, Z., Алексеева, И., Lobova, E., Oksman, A. L., & Mitrofanov, A. (2023) · Computation · doi:10.3390/computation11070132
Chapter 3 Tax Risks: A Dynamic Interplay between Financial and Tax Accounts
Essers, P. (2016) · IBFD eBooks · doi:10.59403/1akg8ge003
Towards Effective Management of Verbal Probability Expressions Using a Co-Learning Approach
Fleiner, C., & Vennekens, J. (2024) · Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · doi:10.3233/faia240189
Visualizing versus verbalizing uncertainty in intelligence analysis
Dhami, M. K., Witt, J. K., & de Werd, P. (2025) · Intelligence & National Security · doi:10.1080/02684527.2025.2468049 · Cited by 2
Cheng, Y.-C. E., & Chen, C.-Y. D. (2023) · Journal of Asian Linguistic Anthropology · doi:10.47298/jala.v5-i3-a1
A Taxonomy for Quantification of Norwegian Probability Phrases
Sætrevik, B., & Bjørkheim, S. B. (2025) · Scandinavian Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/sjop.70040
Wülferth, H. (2013) · Contributions to management science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35837-1_3
The Metacognitive Sensitivity of Verbal Expressions of Confidence in a Perceptual DecisionPreprint
Heduan, F. Á., & Zylberberg, A. D. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.05.13.724887
The impact of compensation on jurors' perceptions of eyewitness testimony
Quinlivan, D. S., & Cash, D. K. (2026) · Legal and Criminological Psychology · doi:10.1111/lcrp.70038
Peleg, R., Hyde, R., & Bokhove, C. (2026) · International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education · doi:10.1007/s10763-026-10692-w
Mock-jurors are insensitive to accuracy differences between showups and lineups
Wang, F., Cash, D. K., & Papesh, M. H. (2026) · Psychology Crime and Law · doi:10.1080/1068316x.2026.2699793
Liu, J., Boivin, J., Lewton, R., Woolner, J., & Morey, R. D. (2026) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2026.109835
Outcome severity increases verbal probabilities used in dyadic communications
Harris, A. J. L., Jirku, S., Surender, N. A., Baskir, J., Wang, Y., & Cheung, V. (2026) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2026.106700
Stochastic Optimization Models for Contingency Allocation in Project Management
Thibadeau, B. M. (2006)
Ordóñez (2000) · doi:10.1002/1099-0771(200007/09)13:3
Metadata
- Authors
- Beyth‐Marom, R.
- Corresponding author
- Beyth‐Marom, Ruth
- Venue
- Journal of Forecasting
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1982-07
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 257-269
- ISSN
- 0277-6693 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-131X
- OpenAlex
- W2004776030
- Cited by
- 527
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 63 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 6.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Forecasting (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Office of Naval Research
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Forecasting Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Keywords
- verbal probability expressions, probability communication, political forecasting, expert opinion, context effects
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
