Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (2023). Numeracy, Gist, Literal Thinking and the Value of Nothing in Decision Making. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2, 421–439.

Abstract: The onus on the average person is greater than ever before to make sense of large amounts of readily accessible quantitative information, but the ability and confidence to do so are frequently lacking. Many people lack practical mathematical skills that are essential for evaluating risks, probabilities and numerical outcomes such as survival rates for medical treatments, income from retirement savings plans or monetary damages in civil trials. In this Review, we integrate research on objective and subjective numeracy, focusing on cognitive and metacognitive factors that distort human perceptions and foment systematic biases in judgement and decision making. Paradoxically, an important implication of this research is that a literal focus on objective numbers and mechanical number crunching is misguided. Numbers can be a matter of life and death but a person who uses rote strategies (verbatim representations) cannot take advantage of the information contained in the numbers because ‘rote’ strategies are, by definition, processing without meaning. Verbatim representations (verbatim is only surface form, not meaning) treat numbers as data as opposed to information. We highlight a contrasting approach of gist extraction: organizing numbers meaningfully, interpreting them qualitatively and making meaningful inferences about them. Efforts to improve numerical cognition and its practical applications can benefit from emphasizing the qualitative meaning of numbers in context — the gist — building on the strengths of humans as intuitive mathematicians. Thus, we conclude by reviewing evidence that gist training facilitates transfer to new contexts and, because it is more durable, longer-lasting improvements in decision making.

Full Paper

Reyna, V. F. (2020). Of Viruses, Vaccines, and Variability: Qualitative Meaning Matters. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(9), 672-675.

Abstract: Deaths from COVID-19 depend on millions of people understanding risk and translating this understanding into risk-reduction behaviors. Although numerical information about risk is helpful, numbers are surprisingly ambiguous, and there are predictable mismatches in risk perception between laypeople and experts. Hence, risk communication should convey the qualitative, contextualized meaning of risk.

Full Paper

Reyna, V. F., Broniatowski, D. A., & Edelson, S. M. (2021). Viruses, Vaccines, and COVID-19: Explaining and Improving Risky Decision-making. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 10(4), 491–509.

Abstract: To detect if someone hides specific knowledge (called “probes”), the response time-based Concealed Information Test (RT-CIT) asks the examinee to classify items into two categories (targets/non-targets). Within the non-targets, slower RTs to the probes reveal recognition of concealed information. The preferred protocol examines one piece of information per test block (single probe protocol), but its validity is suboptimal. The aim of this study was to improve the validity of the single probe protocol by presenting the information in multiple modalities. In a preregistered study (N = 388) participants were instructed to try to hide their nationality. The items referring to the nationality were presented as words, flags, and maps. Increasing the number of modalities of the targets (BF10 = 37), but not of the probes and irrelevants (BF01 = 6), increased the CIT-effect. This broadens the range of the RT-CIT’s applicability, which is an important step towards application in practice.

Full Paper

Reyna, V. F. (2020). A Scientific Theory of Gist Communication and Misinformation Resistance, with Implications for Health, Education, and Policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(16), 8849-8858.

Abstract: A framework is presented for understanding how misinformation shapes decision-making, which has cognitive representations of gist at its core. I discuss how the framework goes beyond prior work, and how it can be implemented so that valid scientific messages are more likely to be effective, remembered, and shared through social media, while misinformation is resisted. The distinction between mental representations of the rote facts of a message—its verbatim representation—and its gist explains several paradoxes, including the frequent disconnect between knowing facts and, yet, making decisions that seem contrary to those facts. Decision makers can falsely remember the gist as seen or heard even when they remember verbatim facts. Indeed, misinformation can be more compelling than information when it provides an interpretation of reality that makes better sense than the facts. Consequently, for many issues, scientific information and misinformation are in a battle for the gist. A fuzzy-processing preference for simple gist explains expectations for antibiotics, the spread of misinformation about vaccination, and responses to messages about global warming, nuclear proliferation, and natural disasters. The gist, which reflects knowledge and experience, induces emotions and brings to mind social values. However, changing mental representations is not sufficient by itself; gist representations must be connected to values. The policy choice is not simply between constraining behavior or persuasion—there is another option. Science communication needs to shift from an emphasis on disseminating rote facts to achieving insight, retaining its integrity but without shying away from emotions and values.

Full Paper

Reyna, V. F. (2023). Social Media: Why Sharing Interferes with Telling True from False. Science Advances, 9(9), eadg8333.

Abstract: Sharing on social media decreases true-false discrimination but focusing on accuracy helps people recognize what they already know. Process-oriented research offers hope in combatting misinformation.

Full Paper