On the Measurement and Properties of Ambiguity in Probabilistic Expectations

Justin T. Pickett, Thomas Loughran, Shawn Bushway

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Survey respondents’ probabilistic expectations are now widely used in many fields to study risk perceptions, decision-making processes, and behavior. Researchers have developed several methods to account for the fact that the probability of an event may be more ambiguous for some respondents than others, but few prior studies have empirically compared the approaches. This article contrasts two of the most prominent methods using data from an experiment embedded in a recent Web survey of 926 volunteer panelists. Specifically, we comparatively evaluate the descriptive and relational properties of ambiguity scores obtained by placing follow-up questions after items eliciting expectations that ask either for (1) a range of probabilities that the respondent is confident to contain the true probability or for (2) a verbal response indicating assuredness. Our results show that these two methods produce measures that have more similarities than differences. Both methods yield ambiguity scores that (1) are not strongly associated with exposure to sources of relevant information, (2) are correlated across seemingly unrelated events, and (3) are consistently related to the level of reported risk.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)636-676
Number of pages41
JournalSociological Methods and Research
Volume44
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2015

Fingerprint

event
source of information
decision-making process
experiment

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{0b18525b059742bea7a645d13ac1cc05,
title = "On the Measurement and Properties of Ambiguity in Probabilistic Expectations",
abstract = "Survey respondents’ probabilistic expectations are now widely used in many fields to study risk perceptions, decision-making processes, and behavior. Researchers have developed several methods to account for the fact that the probability of an event may be more ambiguous for some respondents than others, but few prior studies have empirically compared the approaches. This article contrasts two of the most prominent methods using data from an experiment embedded in a recent Web survey of 926 volunteer panelists. Specifically, we comparatively evaluate the descriptive and relational properties of ambiguity scores obtained by placing follow-up questions after items eliciting expectations that ask either for (1) a range of probabilities that the respondent is confident to contain the true probability or for (2) a verbal response indicating assuredness. Our results show that these two methods produce measures that have more similarities than differences. Both methods yield ambiguity scores that (1) are not strongly associated with exposure to sources of relevant information, (2) are correlated across seemingly unrelated events, and (3) are consistently related to the level of reported risk.",
author = "Pickett, {Justin T.} and Thomas Loughran and Shawn Bushway",
year = "2015",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0049124114546902",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "44",
pages = "636--676",
journal = "Sociological Methods and Research",
issn = "0049-1241",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

On the Measurement and Properties of Ambiguity in Probabilistic Expectations. / Pickett, Justin T.; Loughran, Thomas; Bushway, Shawn.

In: Sociological Methods and Research, Vol. 44, No. 4, 01.11.2015, p. 636-676.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - On the Measurement and Properties of Ambiguity in Probabilistic Expectations

AU - Pickett, Justin T.

AU - Loughran, Thomas

AU - Bushway, Shawn

PY - 2015/11/1

Y1 - 2015/11/1

N2 - Survey respondents’ probabilistic expectations are now widely used in many fields to study risk perceptions, decision-making processes, and behavior. Researchers have developed several methods to account for the fact that the probability of an event may be more ambiguous for some respondents than others, but few prior studies have empirically compared the approaches. This article contrasts two of the most prominent methods using data from an experiment embedded in a recent Web survey of 926 volunteer panelists. Specifically, we comparatively evaluate the descriptive and relational properties of ambiguity scores obtained by placing follow-up questions after items eliciting expectations that ask either for (1) a range of probabilities that the respondent is confident to contain the true probability or for (2) a verbal response indicating assuredness. Our results show that these two methods produce measures that have more similarities than differences. Both methods yield ambiguity scores that (1) are not strongly associated with exposure to sources of relevant information, (2) are correlated across seemingly unrelated events, and (3) are consistently related to the level of reported risk.

AB - Survey respondents’ probabilistic expectations are now widely used in many fields to study risk perceptions, decision-making processes, and behavior. Researchers have developed several methods to account for the fact that the probability of an event may be more ambiguous for some respondents than others, but few prior studies have empirically compared the approaches. This article contrasts two of the most prominent methods using data from an experiment embedded in a recent Web survey of 926 volunteer panelists. Specifically, we comparatively evaluate the descriptive and relational properties of ambiguity scores obtained by placing follow-up questions after items eliciting expectations that ask either for (1) a range of probabilities that the respondent is confident to contain the true probability or for (2) a verbal response indicating assuredness. Our results show that these two methods produce measures that have more similarities than differences. Both methods yield ambiguity scores that (1) are not strongly associated with exposure to sources of relevant information, (2) are correlated across seemingly unrelated events, and (3) are consistently related to the level of reported risk.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84946135099&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84946135099&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0049124114546902

DO - 10.1177/0049124114546902

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84946135099

VL - 44

SP - 636

EP - 676

JO - Sociological Methods and Research

JF - Sociological Methods and Research

SN - 0049-1241

IS - 4

ER -