Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38200204›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2024

The impact of problem domain on Bayesian inferences: A systematic investigation.

Stefania Pighin, Flavia Filimon, Katya Tentori

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Stefania PighinCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Corso Bettini n. 31, 38068, Rovereto, TN, Italy. stefania.pighin@unitn.it.
Flavia FilimonCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Corso Bettini n. 31, 38068, Rovereto, TN, Italy.
Katya TentoriCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Corso Bettini n. 31, 38068, Rovereto, TN, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sparse (and occasionally contradictory) evidence exists regarding the impact of domain on probabilistic updating, some of which suggests that Bayesian word problems with medical content may be especially challenging. The present research aims to address this gap in knowledge through three pre-registered online studies, which involved a total of 2,238 participants. Bayesian word problems were related to one of three domains: medical, daily-life, and abstract. In the first two cases, problems presented realistic content and plausible numerical information, while in the latter, problems contained explicitly imaginary elements. Problems across domains were matched in terms of all relevant statistical values and, as much as possible, wording. Studies 1 and 2 utilized the same set of problems, but different response elicitation methods (i.e., an open-ended and a multiple-choice question, respectively). Study 3 involved a larger number of participants per condition and a smaller set of problems to more thoroughly investigate the magnitude of differences between the domains. There was a generally low rate of correct responses (17.2%, 17.4%, and 14.3% in Studies 1, 2, and 3, respectively), consistent with accuracy levels commonly observed in the literature for this specific task with online samples. Nonetheless, a small but significant difference between domains was observed: participants' accuracy did not differ between medical and daily-life problems, while it was significantly higher in corresponding abstract problems. These results suggest that medical problems are not inherently more difficult to solve, but rather that performance is improved with abstract problems for which participants cannot draw from their background knowledge.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProblem SolvingThinkingYoung AdultBayesian inferenceBayesian reasoningBayesian word problemsNatural frequency formatPosterior probability

Identifiers

PMID38200204
PMCPMC11111539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.