The Role of Numeracy and Impulsivity in Intertemporal Choice and Decision Making

Abstract

A growing body of research has indicated a relationship between numeracy and decision making and that lower numerate people display more disadvantageous decisions. In the domain of intertemporal choice, researchers have long been using impulsivity to address choice preference. To further illuminate the psychological mechanisms of making intertemporal choices, the present study examined the role of impulsivity and numeracy in intertemporal choice, in the presence of each other. The study adopted both subjective and numeracy scales. These scales correlated with each other and with intertemporal choice preference. Moreover, it was found that after controlling for impulsivity, the object numeracy was significantly associated with choice preference, with higher numerate participants showing a stronger preference toward the later larger gains over the sooner smaller gains. Thus, the study indicated that intertemporal choice preference could be attributed to both impulsivity and numeracy.

Decision experience in hyperchoice: the role of numeracy and age differences

“…Third, the study further highlighted the importance of numeracy in decision making. Past studies have found low numeracy is associated with inferior decision outcomes (Cheng 2020 ; Reyna et al 2009 ; Sinayev and Peters 2015 ). The present study extended the findings to decision experience and found lower numerate people faced extra challenges in the scenario of hyperchoice.…”

“…Moreover, lower numeracy has been found to be associated with biased decisions (Peters and Bjalkebring 2015 ). For example, in intertemporal choices, lower numerate people were more likely to select the sooner, smaller gains over the later, larger gains, and hence, made more impulsive choices (Sinayev and Peters 2015 ; Cheng 2020 ). In gamble choices, lower enumerate participants were more likely to deviate from the expected utility axiom (Jasper et al 2017 ).…”

The Influence of Gain-Loss Framing and Its Interaction with Political Ideology on Social Distancing and Mask Wearing Compliance During the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Greater numeracy has been found to be associated with making more advantageous decisions (the numeracy hypothesis raised in Sinayev & Peters, 2015). For example, higher numerate participants were more likely to select the later larger gains over the sooner smaller gains in intertemporal choices (Cheng, 2020). In health and medication-related decisions, higher numerate participants, as opposed to lower counterparts, were more likely to identify and select the best possible treatment (Reyna et al, 2009).…”

“…Subjective numeracy pertains to the willingness and motivation to utilize numerical information, whereas objective numeracy taps into the actual operations (Peters & Bjalkebring, 2015). Despite the conceptual difference, some studies found these two types of numeracy had a similar correlation with gamble choice, intertemporal choice, and how the public perceived the police (Cheng, 2020;Peters & Bjalkebring, 2015;Pham & Cheng, 2020). Taken together, following the numeracy hypothesis and the studies described above, we predict that subjective numeracy is positively associated with the behaviors of social distancing and mask-wearing.…”

Associations Among Functional and Dysfunctional Impulsivity: Direct and Indirect Effects on Sensation Seeking in Youth (19-25 Years Old)

“…the tendency to experience strong impulses and act rashly under conditions of negative mood states, and positive urgency, i.e. the tendency towards rash actions in response to positive mood (Adams et al, 2012;Chase et al, 2017;Daurio et al, 2018;Dick et al, 2010;Gunn et al, 2018;Lynam, n.d.;Ramakrishnan et al, 2019;Reas et al, 2016;Wan et al, 2020;Whiteside & Lynam, 2001;Zhao et al, 2017), decreased sensitivity to negative consequences of behavior and decreased sensitivity to punishment (Cross et al, 2011;Maccalum et al, 2007;Merchán-Clavellino et al, 2020), decreased sensitivity to non-reward (Wan et al, 2020), preference for and sensitivity to immediate smaller reward (Chase et al, 2017;Cheng, 2020;Cross et al, 2011;Maccalum et al, 2007;Merchán-Clavellino et al, 2020;Molero Jurado et al, 2020;Pérez Fuentes et al, 2016;Wan et al, 2020), deficits in self-control, a repeated failure of self-discipline and self-regulation (Cross et al, 2011;Maccalum et al, 2007;Ramakrishnan et al, 2019;Zuckerman, 2014), lack of perseverance (Adams et al, 2012;Chase et al, 2017;Daurio et al, 2018;Dick et al, 2010;Gunn et al, 2018;Lynam, n.d.;Merchán-Clavellino et al, 2020;Ramakrishnan et al, 2019;Reas et al, 2016;Wan et al, 2020;…”