The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring psychological uncertainty: Verbal versus numeric methods.
Abstract
The authors argue that alternatives to the traditional numeric methods of measuring people's uncertainty may prove to hold important advantages under some conditions. In 3 experiments, the authors compared verbal measures involving responses such as very likely, and numeric measures involving responses such as 80% chance. The verbal measures were found to show more sensitivity to various manipulations affecting psychological uncertainty (Experiment 1), to be better predictors of individual preferences among options with unknown outcomes (Experiment 2), and to be better predictors of behavioral intentions (Experiment 3). Results suggest that numeric measures tend to elicit deliberate and rule-based reasoning from respondents, whereas verbal measures allow for more associative and intuitive thinking. Given that there may be many types of situations in which human decisions and behaviors are not based on deliberate and rule-based thinking, numeric measures may misrepresent how individuals think about uncertainty in those situations.
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
“Second, social science research shows that, in human communication, expressing (un)certainty through natural language is often preferred and perceived as more intuitive than numerical expressions [34, 60, 106, 112, 121].”
From "I'm Not Sure, But...": Examining the Impact of Large Language Models' Uncertainty Expression on User Reliance and Trust (2024) · cites this paper as [112]
Citations
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,720
James, W. (1891) · Personality Culture Society · doi:10.1037/11059-000 · Cited by 25,876
Bruner, J. (1986) · doi:10.4159/9780674029019 · Cited by 8,657
Statistical Methods for Psychology.
Gudgeon, A. C., & Howell, D. C. (1994) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.2307/2348956 · Cited by 8,277
Actual Minds, Possible Worlds.
Mergler, N. L., Schleifer, R., & Bruner, J. S. (1986) · MLN · doi:10.2307/2905728 · Cited by 6,626
Handbook of Personality : Theory and Research
Pervin, L. A. (1992) · Cited by 4,543
The empirical case for two systems of reasoning.
Sloman, S. A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.3 · Cited by 3,942
(1967) · Cited by 3,831
Health Belief Model and Personal Health Behavior
Becker, M. H. (1976) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,065
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 327
When Equal Chances = Good Chances: Verbal Probabilities and the Equiprobability Effect
Teigen, K. H. (2001) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2933 · Cited by 30
The Relation Between Probability and Evidence Judgment: An Extension of Support Theory
Idson, L. C., Krantz, D. H., Osherson, D. N., & Bonini, N. (2001) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1023/a:1011131017766 · Cited by 29
Confidence and Accuracy of Eyewitness Identification
Sauer, J. D., & Brewer, N. (2015) · doi:10.1002/9781118469538.ch8 · Cited by 29
Keeling, D. I., Daryanto, A., de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. G. M. (2013) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.07.005 · Cited by 28
Park, K. F., & Shapira, Z. (2017) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_250-1 · Cited by 42
A quantum theory account of order effects and conjunction fallacies in political judgments
Yearsley, J. M., & Trueblood, J. S. (2017) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1371-z · Cited by 27
An Application of Fuzzy Logic to Service Quality Research: A Case of Fitness Service
García, J. A. M., Ko, Y. J., & Martínez, L. (2010) · Journal of Sport Management · doi:10.1123/jsm.24.5.502 · Cited by 28
Windschitl, P. D. (2000) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1999.2876 · Cited by 26
Self-citationChallenges and Future Directions for Human-Drone Interaction Research: An Expert Perspective
Lingam, S. N., Franssen, M., Petermeijer, S. M., & Martens, M. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2400756 · Cited by 25
Group decisions based on confidence weighted majority voting
Meyen, S., Sigg, D., Ulrike Von Luxburg, A., & Franz, V. H. (2021) · Cognitive Research Principles and Implications · doi:10.1186/s41235-021-00279-0 · Cited by 24
Trueblood, J. S., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2010) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 25
Interpretation of recommended risk terms: differences between doctors and lay people
Berry, D. C., Holden, W., & Bersellini, E. (2004) · International Journal of Pharmacy Practice · doi:10.1211/0022357044120 · Cited by 25
Numeric‐to‐verbal translation of probability expressions in SFAS 5
Du, N., & Stevens, K. T. (2011) · Managerial Auditing Journal · doi:10.1108/02686901111113190 · Cited by 24
The Confidence-Accuracy Relationship Using Scale Versus Other Methods of Assessing Confidence
Mansour, J. K. (2020) · Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.01.003 · Cited by 23
Lenhardt, E. D., Cross, R. N., Krocak, M. J., Ripberger, J., Ernst, S. R., Silva, C. L., & Jenkins, H. (2020) · Journal of Operational Meteorology · doi:10.15191/nwajom.2020.0805 · Cited by 18
The Measurement of Subjective Probability: Evaluating the Sensitivity and Accuracy of Various Scales
Haase, N., Renkewitz, F., & Betsch, C. (2013) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.12025 · Cited by 23
Overcoming the Many Pitfalls of Communicating Risk
Waters, E. A., Fagerlin, A., & Zikmund‐Fisher, B. J. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-3486-7_19 · Cited by 23
The influence of reasons on interpretations of probability forecasts
Flugstad, A. R., & Windschitl, P. D. (2003) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.437 · Cited by 23
Self-citationThe Influence of Alternative Outcomes on Gut-Level Perceptions of Certainty
Windschitl, P. D., & Young, M. E. (2001) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2934 · Cited by 23
Self-citationO'Brien, E. K., Baig, S. A., & Persoskie, A. (2021) · Nicotine & Tobacco Research · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntab156 · Cited by 14
Measuring Sentence-Level and Aspect-Level (Un)certainty in Science Communications
Pei, J., & Jurgens, D. (2021) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.784 · Cited by 49
Evaluating scales for pairwise comparisons
Cavallo, B., & Ishizaka, A. (2022) · Annals of Operations Research · doi:10.1007/s10479-022-04682-8 · Cited by 22
Preference uncertainty in stated preference studies: facts and artefacts
Akter, S., & Bennett, J. (2012) · Applied Economics · doi:10.1080/00036846.2012.654914 · Cited by 22
Njoya, I. M., Paris, C., Dinet, J., Luc, A., Lighezzolo‐Alnot, J., Pairon, J. ‐., & Thaon, I. (2016) · European Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckw106 · Cited by 22
Edgcumbe, D. R., Thoma, V., Rivolta, D., Nitsche, M. A., & Fu, C. H. Y. (2018) · Brain stimulation · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2018.12.003 · Cited by 22
Liao, Q., Wong, W. S., & Fielding, R. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0068019 · Cited by 22
Janssen, E., van Osch, L., de Vries, H., & Lechner, L. (2012) · Psychology and Health · doi:10.1080/08870446.2012.751108 · Cited by 22
Knowledge Attributions and Lottery Cases: A Review and New EvidencePreprint
Turri, J. (2020) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/wgtz9 · Cited by 22
Rational Belief in Lottery- and Preface-Situations
Schurz, G. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108379755.008 · Cited by 21
Individual Risk Perceptions and Behavior
Girlando, A., Grima, S., Boztepe, E., Seychell, S., Rupeika-Apoga, R., & Romānova, I. (2021) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s1569-375920210000106023 · Cited by 22
Additivity neglect in probability estimates: Effects of numeracy and response format
Riege, A., & Teigen, K. H. (2013) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.11.004 · Cited by 21
Unpacking unpacking: Greater detail can reduce perceived likelihood.
Redden, J. P., & Frederick, S. (2011) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/a0021491 · Cited by 21
How risky? The impact of target person and answer format on risk assessment
Lermer, E., Streicher, B., Sachs, R., & Frey, D. (2013) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2012.761267 · Cited by 21
Eliciting Subjective Probabilities through Pair‐wise Comparisons
Por, H., & Budescu, D. V. (2016) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.1929 · Cited by 21
Expressing Flood Likelihood: Return Period versus Probability
Grounds, M. A., LeClerc, J. E., & Joslyn, S. L. (2017) · Weather Climate and Society · doi:10.1175/wcas-d-16-0107.1 · Cited by 21
Calcagnì, A., & Lombardi, L. (2014) · Applied Soft Computing · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2014.08.049 · Cited by 22
van Maarle, M. C., Stouthard, M. E. A., & Bonsel, G. J. (2002) · American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.10061 · Cited by 21
Knowledge Attributions and Lottery Cases
Turri, J. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108379755.003 · Cited by 43
When are successes more surprising than failures?
Teigen, K. H., & Keren, G. B. (2002) · Cognition & Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699930143000275 · Cited by 21
On the round number bias and wisdom of crowds in different response formats for numerical estimation
Honda, H., Kagawa, R., & Shirasuna, M. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-11900-7 · Cited by 20
The Informational Effects of Tightening Oil and Gas Disclosure Rules
Badia, M., Duro, M., Jorgensen, B. N., Ormazábal, G., & Christensen, H. B. (2017) · Contemporary Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/1911-3846.12572 · Cited by 18
The impact of item order on ratings of cancer risk perception.
Taylor, K. L., Shelby, R. A., Schwartz, M. D., Ackerman, J. T., LaSalle-Ricci, V. H., Gelmann, E. P., & McGuire, C. (2002) · PubMed · Cited by 19
Xu, Z., Song, T., & Lee, Y.-C. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103455 · Cited by 18
The measurement of risk perceptions: the case of smoking
Baghal, T. A. (2011) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2010.541559 · Cited by 18
Perceived trade-off between education and sports career: evidence from professional football
Schmidt, S. L., Torgler, B., & Jung, V. (2016) · Applied Economics · doi:10.1080/00036846.2016.1248357 · Cited by 18
Eliciting probabilistic expectations: Collaborations between psychologists and economists
de Bruin, W. B., & Fischhoff, B. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1615461114 · Cited by 18
Assessing perceptions of cancer risk: Does mode of assessment or numeracy matter?
Kelly, K. M., Graves, K. D., Harper, F. W. K., Schmidt, J. E., Dickinson, S., & Andrykowski, M. A. (2007) · Cancer Detection and Prevention · doi:10.1016/j.cdp.2007.10.011 · Cited by 18
Windschitl, P. D., Young, M. E., & Jenson, M. E. (2002) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03194947 · Cited by 18
Self-citation“To hope was to expect”: The impact of perspective taking and forecast type on wishful thinking
Rose, J. P., & Aspiras, O. G. (2020) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2170 · Cited by 17
Baghal, T. A. (2014) · Survey research methods · doi:10.18148/srm/2014.v8i3.5813 · Cited by 13
Consedine, N. S., Christie, M. A., & Neugut, A. I. (2008) · British Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1348/135910708x327626 · Cited by 16
Honda, H., & Yamagishi, K. (2009) · Japanese Psychological Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-5884.2009.00409.x · Cited by 16
The intuitive use of contextual information in decisions made with verbal and numerical quantifiers
Liu, D., Juanchich, M., Sirota, M., & Orbell, S. (2020) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1177/1747021820903439 · Cited by 15
Noll, B., Filatova, T., Need, A., & de Vries, P. W. (2022) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116462 · Cited by 15
Introducing Entropy into Organizational Psychology: An Entropy-Based Proactive Control Model
Jia, H., & Wang, L. (2024) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs14010054 · Cited by 24
Fischhoff, B., & de Bruin, W. B. (1999) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0771(199906)12:2 · Cited by 217
Using Different Qualitative Scales in a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Procedure
del Pozo, R. G., Dias, L., & García-Lapresta, J. (2020) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math8030458 · Cited by 12
When, What, and how should generative artificial intelligence explain to Users?
Jang, S., Lee, H., Kim, Y., Lee, D., Shin, J., & Nam, J. (2024) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2024.102175 · Cited by 20
Behavioral Effects of a Delivery Drone on Feelings of Uncertainty: A Virtual Reality Experiment
Lingam, S. N., Petermeijer, S. M., Torre, I., Bazilinskyy, P., Ljungblad, S., & Martens, M. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction · doi:10.1145/3729538 · Cited by 14
Schneider, E., Streicher, B., Lermer, E., Sachs, R., & Frey, D. (2017) · Zeitschrift für Psychologie · doi:10.1027/2151-2604/a000284 · Cited by 18
Millen, A. E., Hope, L., & Hillstrom, A. P. (2020) · Cognitive Research Principles and Implications · doi:10.1186/s41235-020-00227-4 · Cited by 13
The good, the bad and the uncertain: Employers' perceptions of former entrepreneurs
Küsshauer, A., & Baum, M. (2023) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2022.106270 · Cited by 14
Juanchich, M., & Sirota, M. (2017) · Journal of experimental psychology. Applied · doi:10.1037/xap0000137 · Cited by 15
Margins of Prevention : - On Older Adolescents' Positive and Negative Beliefs about Illicit Drug Use
Karlsson, P. (2006) · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · Cited by 13
Salleh, S. I. M., Gardner, J. C., Sulong, Z., & McGowan, C. B. (2011) · Journal of International Education Research (JIER) · doi:10.19030/jier.v7i2.4251 · Cited by 12
Uncertainty Expressions in Accounting: Critical Issues and Recommendations
Zhang, Y., Zoysa, A. D. D., & Cortese, C. (2019) · Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal · doi:10.14453/aabfj.v13i4.2 · Cited by 10
Combining risk perception and risk attitude: A comprehensive individual risk behavior modelPreprint
van Winsen, F., Wauters, E., Lauwers, L., de Mey, Y., Passel, S. V., & Vancauteren, M. (2011) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.115749 · Cited by 12
What Makes Investors Optimistic, What Makes them Afraid?Preprint
Hoffmann, A. O. I., & Post, T. (2012) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2184220 · Cited by 12
Focus to an attribute with verbal or numerical quantifiers affects the attribute framing effect
Holford, D. L., Juanchich, M., & Sirota, M. (2020) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103088 · Cited by 11
Kenchel, J. M., Greenspan, R. L., Reisberg, D., & Dodson, C. S. (2021) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3870 · Cited by 11
Predicting Outcomes in a Sequence of Binary Events: Belief Updating and Gambler's Fallacy Reasoning
Rao, K., & Hastie, R. (2023) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.13211 · Cited by 10
Kim, G., Kim, S., & Hwang, E. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18020428 · Cited by 10
Characteristics of quantifiers moderate the framing effect
Holford, D. L., Juanchich, M., & Sirota, M. (2021) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2251 · Cited by 10
Teigen, K. H., Juanchich, M., & Løhre, E. (2022) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104166 · Cited by 11
The Relation between Degrees of Belief and Binary Beliefs
Dietrich, F. K., & List, C. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108379755.012 · Cited by 10
Differences between decisions made using verbal or numerical quantifiers
Liu, D., Juanchich, M., Sirota, M., & Orbell, S. (2020) · Thinking and Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2020.1720813 · Cited by 12
Bocklisch, F., Bocklisch, S. F., & Krems, J. F. (2010) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14049-5_63 · Cited by 10
Moderators of post‐identification feedback effects on eyewitnesses' memory reports
Douglass, A. B., Brewer, N., & Semmler, C. (2009) · Legal and Criminological Psychology · doi:10.1348/135532509x446337 · Cited by 10
Beliefs, Probabilities, and Their Coherent Correspondence
Kelly, K. T., & Lin, H. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108379755.011 · Cited by 9
Interpreting eyewitness confidence: Numeric, verbal, and graded verbal scales
Greenspan, R. L., & Loftus, E. F. (2023) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.4151 · Cited by 9
Blackwood, J., Carpentier, S. T., Deng, W., & de Winckel, A. V. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0286657 · Cited by 11
The Behavioral Consequences of HIV Testing: An Experimental Investigation
Sen, S. (2004) · Journal of Public Policy & Marketing · doi:10.1509/jppm.23.1.28.30405 · Cited by 9
McDonnell, S. M., Basir, M., Yan, K., Liegl, M. N., & Windschitl, P. D. (2023) · The Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.02.026 · Cited by 8
Self-citationMethods of Influencing the Decisions of Psychiatric Patients
Blumenthal-Barby, J. S. S., McCullough, L. B., Krieger, H., & Coverdale, J. (2013) · Harvard Review of Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/hrp.0b013e3182a75d4f · Cited by 8
A multi-criteria procedure in new product development using different qualitative scales
Garcı́a-Lapresta, J. L., Moreno-Albadalejo, P., Pérez-Román, D., & García, V. T. (2021) · Applied Soft Computing · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107279 · Cited by 8
Shoots‐Reinhard, B. L., Svensson, H., & Peters, E. M. (2021) · Traffic Injury Prevention · doi:10.1080/15389588.2021.1964076 · Cited by 8
The variety of metacognitive feelings: Different phenomena or different terms?
Тихонов, Р., Ammalainen, A. V., & Moroshkina, N. V. (2018) · Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University Psychology · doi:10.21638/11701/spbu16.2018.302 · Cited by 9
How Respondents Use Verbal and Numeric Rating Scales: A Case for Rescaling
Bendixen, M., & Yurova, Y. V. (2012) · International Journal of Market Research · doi:10.2501/ijmr-54-2-261-282 · Cited by 8
Maciejovsky, B., & Budescu, D. V. (2013) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/a0033298 · Cited by 8
Cross‐cultural Comparability of Response Patterns of Subjective Probability Questions
Lee, S.-H., Keusch, F., Schwarz, N., Liu, M., & Suzer‐Gurtekin, Z. T. (2018) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118884997.ch21 · Cited by 7
BELİRSİZLİĞE KARŞI TUTUM ÖLÇEĞİNİN GELİŞTİRİLMESİ
Ersanlı, K., & Uysal, E. (2015) · Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi · doi:10.17755/esosder.16195 · Cited by 7
Fausset, C. B., & Rogers, W. A. (2012) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/1071181312561002 · Cited by 7
Probabilistic Evidence Versus the Representation of an Event: The Curious Case of Mrs. Prob's Dog
Sykes, D. L., & Johnson, J. T. (1999) · Basic and Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1207/15324839951036371 · Cited by 7
Measuring Subjective Risk Estimates
Lermer, E., Streicher, B., & Raue, M. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-92478-6_14 · Cited by 7
Grimm, L. J., Shelby, R. A., Knippa, E. E., Langman, E. L., Miller, L. S., Whiteside, B. E., & Soo, M. S. (2019) · Journal of the American College of Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2018.12.031 · Cited by 7
Eye-tracking evidence for fixation asymmetries in verbal and numerical quantifier processing
Holford, D., Juanchich, M., Foulsham, T., Sirota, M., & Clarke, A. (2021) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500008056 · Cited by 5
The impact of construal level on review consistency and helpfulness in online evaluations
Kovács, B. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2024.108550 · Cited by 7
Kim, S.-H. (2010) · Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles · doi:10.5850/jksct.2010.34.6.913 · Cited by 6
The Psychological Dimension of the Lottery Paradox
Nagel, J. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108379755.004 · Cited by 6
Context dependency in risky decision making: Is there a description-experience gap?
Park, I., Windschitl, P. D., Smith, A. R., Rule, S., Scherer, A. M., & Stuart, J. O. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0245969 · Cited by 6
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Windschitl, P. D., & Wells, G. L.
- Affiliations
- Iowa State University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
- Published
- 1996-12
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 343-364
- ISSN
- 1076-898X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2192
- OpenAlex
- W2000688897
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 4.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Keywords
- psychological uncertainty, decision making under uncertainty, behavioral intention, intuitive thinking, deliberative reasoning, preference prediction
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