CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 261Climate Change Communication and PerceptionRisk Perception and ManagementClimate Change Policy and Economics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effective communication of uncertainty in the IPCC reports

Budescu, David V., Por, Han-Hui, Broomell, Stephen B.·2012·Climatic Change
DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0330-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10584-011-0330-3

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 56

  1. Bastardi A, Uhlmann EL, Ross L (2011) Wishful thinking: belief, desire, and the motivated evaluation of scientific evidence. Psychol Sci 22:731–732 · DOI
  2. Begley S (2007) The truth about denial. Newsweek 150:20–29
  3. Brun W, Teigen KH (1988) Verbal probabilities: ambiguous, context-dependent, or both? Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 41:390–414 · DOI
  4. Bryant G, Norman G (1980) Expressions of probability: words and numbers. N Engl J Med 302:411
  5. Budescu DV, Wallsten TS (1990) Dyadic decisions with numerical and verbal probabilities. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 46:240–263 · DOI
  6. Budescu DV, Wallsten TS (1985) Consistency in interpretation of probabilistic phrases. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 36:391–405 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Budescu DV, Wallsten TS (1987) Subjective estimation of precise and vague uncertainties. In: Wright G, Ayton P (eds) Judgmental forecasting. Wiley, New York, pp 63–82
  8. Budescu DV, Weinberg S, Wallsten TS (1988) Decisions based on numerically and verbally expressed uncertainties. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 14:281–294 · DOI
  9. Budescu DV, Karelitz TM, Wallsten TS (2003) Predicting the directionality of probability words from their membership functions. J Behav Decis Mak 16:159–180 · DOI
  10. Chesley GR (1985) Interpretation of uncertainty expressions. Contemp Account Res 2:179–199 · DOI
  11. Clarke VA, Ruffin CL, Hill DJ, Beamen AL (1992) Ratings of orally presented verbal expressions of probability by a heterogeneous sample. J Appl Soc Psychol 22:638–656 · DOI
  12. Dhami MK, Wallsten TS (2005) Interpersonal comparison of subjective probabilities: toward translating linguistic probabilities. Mem Cognit 33:1057–1068 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Erev I, Cohen BL (1990) Verbal versus numerical probabilities: Efficiency, biases, and the preference paradox. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 45:1–18 · DOI
  14. Erev I, Wallsten TS, Neal M (1991) Vagueness, ambiguity, and the cost of mutual understanding. Psychol Sci 2:231–324 · DOI
  15. illenbaum S, Wallsten TS, Cohen BL, Cox JA (1991) Some effects of vocabulary and communication task on the understanding and use of vague probability expressions. Am J Psychol 104:35–60 · DOI
  16. Fischer K, Jungermann H (1996) Rarely occurring headaches and rarely occurring blindness: is rarely = rarely? The meaning of verbal frequentistic labels in specific medical contexts. J Behav Decis Mak 9:153–172 · DOI
  17. Fischhoff B (1994) What forecasts (seem to) mean. Int J Forecast 10:387–403 · DOI
  18. Frederick S (2005) Cognitive reflection and decision making. J Econ Perspect 19(4):25–42 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Fox CR, Irwin JR (1998) The role of context in the communication of uncertain beliefs. Basic Appl Soc Psychol 20:57–70 · DOI
  20. Hamm RM (1991) Selection of verbal probabilities: a solution for some problems of verbal probability expression. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 48:193–223 · DOI
  21. Heath Y, Gifford R (2006) Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: the case of belief in global climate change. Environ Behav 38:48–71 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Ha-Duong M, Swart R, Bernstein L, Petersen R (2007) Uncertainty management in the IPCC: agreeing to disagree. Glob Environ Chang 17:8–11 · DOI
  23. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2001) Summary for policymakers: contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Retrieved July 2009 from http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/pdf/WG1_TAR-FRONT.pdf · DOI
  24. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2005) Guidance notes for lead authors of the IPCC fourth assessment report on addressing uncertainties. Retrieved February 2011 from http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/ar4-workshops-express-meetings/uncertainty-guidance-note.pdf
  25. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) Summary for policymakers: contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Retrieved February 2007 from http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf · DOI
  26. Johnson EM (1973) Numerical encoding of qualitative expressions of uncertainty (Technical paper No. 250). US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral & Social Sciences · DOI
  27. Karelitz TM, Budescu DV (2004) You say “Probable” and I say “Likely”: improving interpersonal communication with verbal probability phrases. J Exp Psychol Appl 10:25–41 · DOI
  28. Kong A, Barnett GO, Mosteller F, Youtz C (1986) How medical professionals evaluate expressions of probability. N Engl J Med 315:740–744 · DOI
  29. Lipkus IM (2007) Communicating the uncertainty of harms and benefits of medical interventions. Med Decis Making 27:681–695 · DOI
  30. Mapes REA (1979) Verbal and numerical estimates of probability terms. J Gen Intern Med 6:237
  31. Merz JF, Druzdzel MJ, Mazur DJ (1991) Verbal expressions of probability in informed consent litigation. J Med Decis Making 11:273–281 · DOI
  32. Mosteller F, Youtz C (1990) Quantifying probabilistic expressions. Stat Sci 5:2–16 · DOI
  33. Mullet E, Rivet I (1991) Comprehension of verbal probability expressions in children and adolescents. Lang Comm 11:217–225 · DOI
  34. Nakao M, Axelrod S (1983) Numbers are better than words: verbal specifications of frequency have no place in medicine. Am J Med 74:1061 · DOI
  35. Nickerson RS (1998) Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev Gen Psychol 2:175–220 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Nobelprize.org (2008) The Nobel peace prize 2007. Retrieved November 2007 from http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/press.html
  37. Olson MJ, Budescu DV (1997) Patterns of preference for numerical and verbal probabilities. J Behav Decis Mak 10:117–131 · DOI
  38. Patt AG, Schrag DP (2003) Using specific language to describe risk and probability. Clim Chang 61:17–30. doi: 10.1023/A:1026314523443 · DOI
  39. Pepper S, Prytulak LS (1974) Sometimes frequently means seldom: context effects in the interpretation of quantitative expressions. J Res Personal 8:95–101 · DOI
  40. Peters E, Västfjäll D, Slovic P, Mertz CK, Mazzocco K, Dickert S (2006) Numeracy and decision making. Psychol Sci 17:407–413 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Pew Research Center for for the People and the Press (2009) Scientific achievements less prominent than a decade ago: public praise science; Scientists fault public, media. Retrieved Novermber 2009 from http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/528.pdf
  42. Piercey MD (2009) Motivated reasoning and verbal vs. numerical probability assessment: evidence from an accounting context. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 108:330–341 · DOI
  43. Pyszcynski T, Greenberg J (1987) Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inferences: a biased hypothesis testing model. In: Berkowitz L (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology. Academic Press, New York, pp 297–340 · DOI
  44. Reagan R, Mosteller F, Youtz C (1989) Quantitative meanings of verbal probability expressions. J Appl Psychol 74:433–442 · DOI
  45. Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ (2007) The importance of mathematics in health and human judgment: numeracy, risk communication, and medical decision making. Learn Individ Differ 17:147–159 · DOI
  46. Smithson M, Budescu DV, Broomell SB, Por H (2011) Never say “Not:” impact of negative wording in probability phrases on imprecise probability judgments. Presented at 7th International Symposium on Imprecise Probability: Theories and Applications, Innsbruck, Austria · DOI
  47. Sterman JD (2011) Communicating climate change risks in a skeptical world. Climatic Change. In press · DOI
  48. Sutherland HJ, Lockwood GA, Tritchler DL, Sem F (1991) Communicating probabilistic information to cancer patients: is there “noise” on the line? Soc Sci Med 32:725–731 · DOI
  49. Teigen KH, Brun W (1999) The directionality of verbal probability expressions: effects on decisions, predictions and probabilistic reasoning. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 80:155–190 · DOI
  50. Wallsten TS, Budescu DV (1995) A review of human linguistic probability processing: general principles and empirical evidence. Knowl Eng Rev 10:43–62 · DOI
  51. Wallsten TS, Budescu DV, Zwick R, Kemp SM (1993) Preferences and reasons for communicating probabilistic information in numerical or verbal terms. Bull Psychon Soc 31:135–138 · DOI · Paper page
  52. Wallsten TS, Fillenbaum S, Cox JA (1986) Base rate effects on the interpretations of probability and frequency expressions. J Mem Lang 25:571–587 · DOI
  53. Weber EU, Hilton DJ (1990) Contextual effects in the interpretations of probability words: perceived base rate and severity of events. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:781–789 · DOI
  54. Witteman C, Renooij S (2003) Evaluation of a verbal–numerical probability scale. Int J Approx Reason 33:117–131 · DOI
  55. Witteman C, Renooij S, Koele PM (2007) Medicine in words and numbers: a cross-sectional survey comparing probability assessment scales. BMC Med Informat Decis Making 7 · DOI
  56. Zwick R, Wallsten TS (1989) Combining stochastic uncertainty and linguistic inexactness: theory and experimental evaluation of four fuzzy probability models. Int J Man Mach Stud 30:69–111 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 261

Metadata

Authors
Budescu, D. V., Por, H.-H., & Broomell, S. B.
Affiliations
  • Fordham University (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
Budescu, David V.
ORCID
Venue
Climatic Change
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2011-11-23
Volume
113
Issue
2
Pages
181-200
ISSN
  • 0165-0009 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1480
DOI
10.1007/s10584-011-0330-3
OpenAlex
W1994500457
Cited by
261
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
FWCI
30.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Climatic Change (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
Keywords
uncertainty communication, IPCC reports, regression to the mean, individual differences, political ideology, climate change beliefs, science communication

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