Now you see it now you don’t: The effectiveness of the recognition heuristic for selecting stock

It has been proposed that recognition can form the basis of simple but ecologically rational decision strategies (Gigerenzer \& Goldstein, 1996). Borges, Goldstein, Ortmann, \& Gigerenzer (1999) found that constructing share portfolios based on simple name recognition alone often yielded better returns than the market index. We describe four studies with seven samples of participants from three countries (total N = 319) in which the returns of recognized and unrecognized shares from several stock markets were tracked over various periods of time. We find no support for the claim that a simple strategy of name recognition can be used as a general strategy to select stocks that yield better-than-average returns. However, there was some suggestion in the data that recognition performs better when the market is falling and worse when it is rising. A follow-up study indicated that the absence of an overall recognition effect could not easily be attributed to our reliance on student participants or smaller samples than Borges et al.\ (1999) had used. We conclude that, with respect to changes in value, selecting stocks on the basis of name recognition is a near-random method of portfolio construction that offers little, if any, benefit to the personal investor

Simple and Multistate Survival Curves

Objective and Sample: This investigation assessed the comprehension of survival curves in a community sample of 88 young and middle-aged adults when several aspects of good practice for graphical communication were implemented, and it compared comprehension for alternative presentation formats. Design, Method, and Measurements: After reading worked examples of using survival curves that provided explanation and answers, participants answered questions on survival data for pairs of treatments. Study 1 compared presenting survival curves for both treatments on the same figure against presentation via 2 separate figures. Study 2 compared presenting data for 3 possible outcome states via a single “multistate” figure for each treatment against presenting each outcome on a separate figure (with both treatments on the same figure). Both studies compared alternative forms of questioning (e.g., “number alive” versus “number dead”). Numeracy levels (self-rated and objective measures) were also assessed. Results: Comprehension was generally good—exceeding 90% correct answers on half the questions—and was similar across alternative graphical formats. Lower accuracy was observed for questions requiring a calculation but was significantly lower only when the requirement for calculation was not explicit (13%–28% decrements in performance). In study 1, this effect was most acute for those with lower levels of numeracy. Subjective (self-rated) numeracy and objective (measured) numeracy were both moderate positive predictors of overall task accuracy (r ≈ 0.3). Conclusions: A high degree of accuracy in extracting information from survival curves is possible, as long as any calculations that are required are made explicit (e.g., finding differences between 2 survival rates). Therefore, practitioners need not avoid using survival curves in discussions with patients, although clear and explicit explanations are important </jats:p

Examining insensitivity to probability in evidence‐based communication of relative risks: the role of affect and communication format

Affect can influence judgments of event riskiness and use of risk-related information. Two studies (Ns: 85 and 100) examined the insensitivity-to-probability effect—where people discount probability information when scenarios are affect-rich—applying it to evidence-informed risk communication. We additionally investigated whether this effect is moderated by format, based on predictions from the evaluability and pattern-recognition literatures, suggesting that graphical formats may attenuate insensitivity to probability. Participants completed a prior beliefs questionnaire (Study 1), and risk perception booklet (both studies) that presented identical statistical information about the relative risks associated with two scenarios—one with an affect-rich outcome, the other an affect-poorer outcome. In Study 1, this was presented graphically. In Study 2, information was presented in one of three formats: written, tabular, or graphical. Participants provided their perceptions of the risk for each scenario at a range of risk-levels. The affect-rich scenario was perceived as higher in risk, and, importantly, despite presenting identical relative risk information in both scenarios, was associated with a reduced sensitivity to probability information (both studies). These differences were predicted by participants’ prior beliefs concerning the scenario events (Study 1) and were larger for the single-item written format than graphical format (Study 2). The findings illustrate that insensitivity to probability information can occur in evidence-informed risk communications and highlight how communication format can moderate this effect. This interplay between affect and format therefore reflects an important consideration for information designers and researchers

Transformierte Buddhismen

Die Beiträge der Zeitschrift befassen sich auf der Basis neuester Forschungsergebnisse sowohl mit historischen Prozessen als auch rezenten Entwicklungen in den verschiedenen Buddhismen. Dabei werden lokal spezifische wie auch transkulturelle Adaptions-, Transformations- und Innovationsprozesse in den Blick genommen. Der Fokus der Beiträge liegt auf Wandlungsprozessen in buddhistischen Vorstellungen, Rhetoriken, Praktiken und Ästhetiken, die durch historische und gesellschaftliche Veränderungen als auch durch den geographischen Transfer buddhistischer Ideen und Praktiken (z.B. zwischen Ost und West und umgekehrt) hervorgerufen wurden und werden. Im Rahmen der Zeitschrift werden für das skizzierte Themenfeld relevante Publikationen besprochen

Outdoor recreational activity experiences improve psychological wellbeing of military veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder: Positive findings from a pilot study and a randomised controlled trial

Exposure to the natural environment is increasingly considered to benefit psychological health. Recent reports in the literature also suggest that outdoor exposure that includes recreational pursuits such as surfing or fishing coupled with opportunities for social interaction with peers may be beneficial to Armed Forces Veterans experiencing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Two studies were conducted to evaluate this possibility. In particular, these studies aimed to test the hypothesis that a brief group outdoor activity would decrease participants’ symptoms as assessed by established measures of PTSD, depression, anxiety and perceived stress, and increase participants’ sense of general social functioning and psychological growth. Experiment one employed a repeated measures design in which UK men and women military veterans with PTSD (N = 30) participated in a group outdoor activity (angling, equine care, or archery and falconry combined). Psychological measures were taken at 2 weeks prior, 2 weeks post, and at 4 month follow up. We obtained a significant within participant main effect indicating significant reduction in PTSD symptoms. Experiment two was a waitlist controlled randomised experiment employing an angling experience (N = 18) and 2 week follow up. In experiment 2 the predicted interaction of Group (Experimental vs. Waitlist Control) X Time (2 weeks pre vs. 2 weeks post) was obtained indicating that the experience resulted in significant reduction in PTSD symptoms relative to waitlist controls. The effect size was large. Additional analyses confirmed that the observed effects might also be considered clinically significant and reliable. In sum, peer outdoor experiences are beneficial and offer potential to complement existing provision for military veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

Understanding the Effect of Information Presentation Order and Orientation on Information Search and Treatment Evaluation

Background. Past research finds that treatment evaluations are more negative when risks are presented after benefits. This study investigates this order effect: manipulating tabular orientation and order of risk–benefit information, and examining information search order and gaze duration via eye-tracking. Design. 108 (Study 1) and 44 (Study 2) participants viewed information about treatment risks and benefits, in either a horizontal (left-right) or vertical (above-below) orientation, with the benefits or risks presented first (left side or at top). For 4 scenarios, participants answered 6 treatment evaluation questions (1–7 scales) that were combined into overall evaluation scores. In addition, Study 2 collected eye-tracking data during the benefit–risk presentation. Results. Participants tended to read one set of information (i.e., all risks or all benefits) before transitioning to the other. Analysis of order of fixations showed this tendency was stronger in the vertical (standardized mean rank difference further from 0, M = ±.88) than horizontal orientation (M = ± 0.71). Approximately 50% of the time was spent reading benefits when benefits were shown first, but this was reduced to ~40% when risks were presented first (regression coefficient: B = −4.52, p <.001). Eye-tracking measures did not strongly predict treatment evaluations, although time percentage reading benefits positively predicted evaluation when holding other variables constant (B = 0.02, p =.023). Conclusion. These results highlight the impact of seemingly arbitrary design choices on inspection order. For instance, presenting risks where they will be seen first leads to relatively less time spent considering treatment benefits. Other research suggests these changes to inspection order can influence multi-option and multi-attribute choices, and represent an area for future research