English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Book Chapter

How to measure risk comprehension in educated samples

MPS-Authors
There are no MPG-Authors in the publication available
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Cokely, E., Ghazal, S., Galesic, M., García-Retamero, R., & Schulz, E. (2013). How to measure risk comprehension in educated samples. In Transparent communication of health risks: Overcoming cultural differences (pp. 29-52). New York, NY, USA: Springer.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0006-B458-C
Abstract
The Berlin Numeracy Test is a psychometrically sound instrument designed to quickly assess statistical numeracy and risk comprehension in educated samples (e.g., college students or medical and business professionals). The test is available in multiple languages and formats including an online adaptive test that automatically scores data ( http://www.riskliteracy.org ). In this chapter, we review results of a validation study (n = 300) documenting convergent (e.g., cognitive ability, numeracy), discriminant (e.g., personality, life satisfaction), and predictive validity (e.g., numerical and non-numerical risky choices). The Berlin Numeracy Test was found to be the strongest predictor of a battery of everyday risky decisions (e.g., evaluating claims about medical treatments, consumer goods, and interpreting forecasts), providing more than twice the predictive power of other numeracy instruments. The Berlin Numeracy Test also accounted for unique variance beyond other related cognitive tests (e.g., cognitive reflection, working memory, and intelligence). Twenty additional validation studies (n = 5,036) indicated that the Berlin Numeracy Test maintained psychometric discriminability across 15 countries (e.g., China, England, Germany, Japan, India, Pakistan, Spain, Sweden, and the USA) and various samples (i.e., community samples, Mechanical Turk web panels, medical professionals). Discussion centers on construct validity and the benefits and limits of adaptive testing.