Motivated numeracy and active reasoning in a Western European sample

Numerical format and public perception of foreign immigration growth rates

The study aimed to explore whether the 1-in-X bias is also present in relation to immigration growth rates. We tested this research question on a representative sample of adult residents in Trento, Italy, between March and April 2019. Participants were presented with data comparing the foreign immigrant-to-resident population ratio in Italy for 2001 (1 in 40) and 2011 (1 in 15), using two distinct formats-1-in-X and percentages. They were then asked to express the perceived increase. Baseline measures of several individual-level factors, including cultural worldviews, perceptions of immigration, numeracy, science literacy, and economic literacy, were also collected to explore the potential role of individual differences in influencing the effect of the 1-in-X format on the perceived increase in immigrants. The results confirmed the existence of the 1-in-X bias, demonstrating that the immigration growth rate in the 1-in-X format was perceived as higher than in the percentage format, even after controlling for the effects of the idiosyncratic variables. The results of this study provide insight into how different numerical formats can influence public perceptions of immigration growth rates, offering suggestions to policymakers, communicators, and stakeholders about how the presentation of information can shape public opinion.

Motivated reasoning about climate change and the influence of Numeracy, Need for Cognition, and the Dark Factor of Personality

Human information processing is not always rational but influenced by prior attitudes, a phenomenon commonly known as motivated reasoning. We conducted two studies (N1 = 556, N2 = 1198; UK samples) investigating motivated reasoning in the context of climate change with a focus on individual differences as potential moderating factors. While previous research investigated motivated reasoning regarding the debate whether climate change is anthropogenic, we focused on current discourses about the effectiveness of different countermeasures. To this end, participants evaluated fictitious scientific data on the effectiveness of regulations to reduce CO2 emissions. In both studies, participants exhibited motivated reasoning as indicated by the observation that prior attitudes about CO2 reduction policies predicted evaluation of the scientific data. The degree of motivated reasoning was not related to individual difference variables, namely the ability to understand and reason with numbers (Numeracy), the willingness to show this ability (Need for Cognition), and the tendency to maximize one's individual utility (Dark Factor of Personality). However, numeracy was associated with a less biased interpretation of the presented information. Our research demonstrates that motivated reasoning is a general phenomenon, and points to numerical training as one way to improve reasoning.

Misinformation: susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public

The spread of misinformation poses a considerable threat to public health and the successful management of a global pandemic. For example, studies find that exposure to misinformation can undermine vaccination uptake and compliance with public-health guidelines. As research on the science of misinformation is rapidly emerging, this conceptual Review summarizes what we know along three key dimensions of the infodemic: susceptibility, spread, and immunization. Extant research is evaluated on the questions of why (some) people are (more) susceptible to misinformation, how misinformation spreads in online social networks, and which interventions can help to boost psychological immunity to misinformation. Implications for managing the infodemic are discussed.

The role of motivated science reception and numeracy in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic

The successful management of the COVID-19 pandemic depends on individuals accepting the current state of research and adhering to the preventive behaviors that follow from it. However, the processing of scientific results is not always rational, but influenced by prior attitudes as well as the ability to understand statistical data. Against this background, this study investigated the role of motivated reasoning and numeracy in the context of the current pandemic. To this end, participants (N = 417; US sample) evaluated two fictitious studies, one indicating that mask mandates in schools are an effective intervention to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2, and one indicating that mask mandates in schools are counterproductive. Participants evaluated the studies in line with their prior attitude toward mask mandates. In addition, higher numeracy was associated with decreased bias, demonstrating that the ability to reason with numbers can lead to more accurate processing of statistical information.

A preregistered replication of motivated numeracy

Motivated numeracy refers to the idea that people with high reasoning capacity will use that capacity selectively to process information in a manner that protects their own valued beliefs. This concept was introduced in a now classic article by Kahan, Peters, Dawson, & Slovic [2017, Behavioral Public Policy 1, 54-86], who used numeracy to index reasoning capacity, and demonstrated that the tendency to engage in ideologically congruent interpretation of facts increased substantially with people's numeracy. Despite the importance of this finding, both from a theoretical and practical point of view, there is yet no consensus in the literature about the factual strength of motivated numeracy. We therefore conducted a large-scale replication of Kahan, Peters, Dawson, and Slovic (2017), using a pre-specified analysis plan with strict evaluation criteria. We did not find good evidence for motivated numeracy; there are distinct patterns in our data at odds with the core predictions of the theory, most notably (i) there is ideologically congruent responding that is not moderated by numeracy, and (ii) when there is moderation, ideologically congruent responding occurs only at the highest levels of numeracy. Our findings suggest that the cumulative evidence for motivated numeracy is weaker than previously thought, and that caution is warranted when this feature of human cognition is leveraged to improve science communication on contested topics such as climate change or immigration.