The present research firstly reviewed the experimental literature on probability expression and probability judgment, hypothesizing that individuals’ preference of probability expressions (verbal probability vs. numerical probability) and tendency for overextremity in probability judgment might differ with respect to different types of uncertainty. Five studies were conducted to test this hypothesis. In Study 1, questionnaires were used to explore the communication preference among Chinese-speaking people. Study 2 adapted the View of Uncertainty Questionnaire to explore the difference of verbal answers to three kinds of uncertainty. Study 3 and Study 4 used methods of the paper-and-pencil questionnaire and the laboratory experiment, respectively, to test the effects of uncertainty types on the preference of probability expressions and on the tendency for over-extreme probability judgment. Finally, Study 5 focused on individuals’ preference of probability expressions under various kinds of scenarios. The results were as follows:
1. The Communication Model Preference paradox phenomenon appears to be even more pronounced in the Chinese culture than in American English cultural settings.
2. The Chinese prefer more verbal probability expressions when communicating uncertainty in a weather-forecasting context than in a general context.
3. Sample groups with lower level of westernization tend to give more extreme answers and less probabilistic answers.
4. Types of uncertainty did have effects on individuals’ tendency for over-extreme probability judgment: under a traditional probability judgment task, people tend to be more over-extreme on internal uncertainty events than on external uncertainty events; however, this result is reversed under a gambling task.
5. Individuals’ preference for verbal probability expressions is more salient on internal uncertain events than on external uncertain events.本研究回顾了概率表达和概率判断的相关研究，提出不确定类型会影响人们的概率表达偏好（文字概率vs数字概率）和概率判断的极端性倾向。本研究通过五个实验试图验证这一假设。研究一用问卷调查的形式探索中国人在一般情境和天气预报情境下的概率表达偏好。研究二用“不确定性观念问卷”探索被试在三类不确定性问题上用文字作答的极端性倾向是否存在差异。研究三和研究四分别通过纸笔问卷和实验室实验考察不确定类型对人们的概率表达偏好和概率判断的极端性倾向的影响。研究五采用情境模拟材料来探索被试在各种情境下的概率表达偏好。主要研究结论如下：
1. 中国人出现沟通模式偏好悖论的比例(58.7%)显著高于美国人的相应比例(35%)。
2. 中国人在天气预报情境下比在一般情境下更偏好用文字概率表达来接受和传递信息。
3. 随着西化程度的降低，被试群体使用“是/否”这种极端性回答不确定性问题的程度更高，使用概率词回答的程度更低。
4. 不确定类型会影响人们概率判断的极端性倾向：在传统的概率判断任务下，人们在已有答案的内部不确定问题上表现出更高的极端性概率判断倾向；在赌博任务下，人们在尚无答案的外部不确定问题上表现出更高的极端性概率判断倾向和更高的冒险倾向。
5. 人们在概率表达上的偏好受到不确定性类型的影响：人们在未来无答案（外部不确定性）事件下比在过去有答案(内部不确定性)事件下更偏好文字概率表达
