Introduction
A-Z Scales
Categories
Decision
Style
Approach
Risk Attitude
Cognitive Ability
Motivation
Personality
Inventories
Constructs
Miscellaneous

Numeracy - Expanded (11-item) Scale

Lipkus, I. M., Samsa, G., & Rimer, B. K. (2001). General performance on a Numeracy Scale among highly educated samples. Medical Decision Making, 21(1), 37-44. doi: 10.1177/0272989X0102100105
See also the original 3-item Numeracy measure by Schwartz et al. (1997) and the further expanded 15-item Numeracy measure by Peters et al. (2007).


Table of Contents


Description


History of Use


References


Description:

Purpose

The Numeracy measures were designed to assess numeracy, which is the ability to understand and use numeric information.
  • The 11-item measure adds 8 items to Schwartz et al.'s (1997) original measure.
  • Specifically, the expanded 11-item measure assesses understanding of risk and fractions as well as chance, proportions, and percentages.
  • See also the original Schwartz et al. (1997) 3-item measure and the expanded Peters et al. (2007) 15-item measure.
Questions

11 items using a mixed free-response and multiple-choice format
Sub-scales

N/A
Domain

  • Medical decision making
  • Framing
  • Affect in decision making
Psychometrics


Sample items

  • Which of the following numbers represents the biggest risk of getting a disease?
    • 1 in 100
    • 1 in 1000
    • 1 in 10
  • If the chance of getting a disease is 20 out of 100, this would be the same as having a __%
    chance of getting the disease.

History of Use:

Under-Construction.gif
Scale Uses:


  • Numeracy x framing: High numerate (identified by median split) were less susceptible to attribute framing, F(1,96) = 5.6, p < .05, η2 = .11. (Study 1)
  • Numeracy x framing: High numerate (median split) were less susceptible to formatting differences (percentage vs. frequency), F(1,42) = 4.0, p < .05, η2 = .42. (Study 2)
  • Numeracy: High numerate (median split) had more precise affect about choices, t(44) = -2.6, p < .01, d= .78. (Study 3)
  • Numeracy: High numerate (median split) rated superior no-loss bet lower than inferior loss bet, t(89) = 3.1, p <.01, whereas low numerate rated bets equally. [Conclusion: More numerate have clearer feelings about probability but sometimes pick worse gamble.] (Study 4)

Peters et al. (2006)

References:

Scale:
Lipkus, I. M., Samsa, G., & Rimer, B. K. (2001). General performance on a Numeracy Scale among highly educated samples. Medical Decision Making, 21(1), 37-44. doi: 10.1177/0272989X0102100105
Other Versions of Numeracy:
  • Peters, E., Dieckmann, N. F., Dixon, A., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., & Hibbard, J. H. (2007). Less is more in presenting quality information to consumers. Medical Care Research and Review, 64(2), 169-190. doi: 10.1177/10775587070640020301
Selected Uses:
  • Fagerlin, A., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Ubel, P. A., Jankovic, A., Derry, H. A., & Smith, D. M. (2007). Measuring numeracy without a math test: Development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale. Medical Decision Making, 27(5), 672-680. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07304449
  • Garcia-Retamero, R., & Galesic, M. (2009). Communicating treatment risk reduction to people with low numeracy skills: A cross-cultural comparison. American Journal of Public Health, 99(12), 2196-2202. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.160234
  • Peters, E., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Mazzocco, K., & Dickert, S. (2006). Numeracy and decision making. Psychological Science, 17(5), 407-413. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01720.x
  • Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (2008). Numeracy, ratio bias, and denominator neglect in judgments of risk and probability. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(1), 89-107. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2007.03.011
  • Reyna, V. F., Nelson, W. L., Han, P. K., & Dieckmann, N. F. (2009). How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 135(6), 943-973. doi: 10.1037/a0017327
  • Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Smith, D. M., Ubel, P. A., & Fagerlin, A. (2007). Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS): Effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Medical Decision Making, 27(5), 663-671. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07303824


*