Search

This paper reports some experiments on probabilistic reasoning designed to investigate the impact of the probabilistic problem presentation format (verbal-numerical and graphical-pictorial) on subjects' confidence in the correctness of their performance, other than the calibration between confidence and accuracy. To understand the potential effect of the format, these dimensions were assessed by monitoring contextual and individual variables: time pressure, numerical and visuospatial abilities, statistical anxiety and attitudes towards statistics. The participants included 257 Psychology students without statistical knowledge, recruited from Italian and Spanish universities, who fulfilled self-report validated measures. The students expressed their retrospective judgments of confidence item-by-item in relation to each probabilistic problem. This approach enabled the computation of two measures of calibration (the Bias Index - the Confidence-Judgment Accuracy Quotient). The results indicated that the problem presentation format did not exert a significant main effect on confidence, with the exception of when the interaction between the format and one subscale of the attitudes towards the statistics test was considered. The Bias Index, however, was significantly related to the interaction between format and time pressure. The study offers a point of reflection in relation to the potential effect exerted by the problem format and time constraint in calibration.

A cross-national comparison between Italy and Spain was conducted on probabilistic reasoning performance presented in verbal-numerical and graphical-pictorial formats. This study investigated the similarities and differences in Psychology undergraduates in these two countries (Italy n=290; Spain n=130) and attempted to identify aspects that might enhance the probability of a student belonging to one country. The findings underscored that Spanish students had higher levels of visuospatial abilities, more positive attitudes toward statistics, lower statistical anxiety, and higher confidence in the correctness of their responses. Additionally, they gave a higher number of correct responses to problems presented in a verbal-numerical format. These data suggest interesting insights and highlight the interactions among multiple layers of variables at the collective, contextual, and individual levels.