Despite high objective numeracy, lower numeric confidence relates to worse financial and medical outcomes
Despite high objective numeracy, lower numeric confidence relates to worse financial and medical outcomes
复制标题
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.1903126116
复制
发表时间：
2019-09-24
影响因子：
11.1
通讯作者：
Meara, Alexa Simon
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Peters, Ellen;Tompkins, Mary Kate;Meara, Alexa Simon
人们经常嘲笑自己“数学不好”。“然而，没有认识到的是，大约三分之一的美国成年人可能太不识数，无法在金融和健康环境中有效运作。可以想象，有两种数字能力是重要的客观数字能力（正确“计算数字”的能力;类似于识字，但与数字有关）和数字自我效能感（在数字任务中提供参与和持久性的信心）。然而，我们的理由是，实现客观的算术的好处应该取决于数字的信心。具体来说，在更客观的计算中，拥有更多的数字自信（相对于更少）应该会带来更好的结果，因为他们坚持数字任务，并且拥有支持数字成功的技能。然而，在不太客观的计算中，拥有更多（相对于更少）的数字信心应该会损害结果，因为它们也会持续存在，但会犯下未被识别的错误。设计了两项研究来测试这种假设相互作用的普遍性。我们报告了对美国不同数据集财务结果的二次分析和对系统性红斑狼疮患者疾病活动性的主要分析。在这两个领域，最好的结果似乎需要数字计算技能和数字信心的持久性。“不匹配”的个体（高能力/低信心或低能力/高信心）经历了最糟糕的结果。例如，在计算能力最强的患者中，只有7%的数字更自信的患者预测需要进一步治疗的疾病活动性，而高计算能力/低信心患者和低计算能力/高信心患者分别为31%和44%。我们的工作强调，拥有这些能力之一（客观计算能力或数字自我效能）并不能保证上级的结果。
People often laugh about being "no good at math." Unrecognized, however, is that about one-third of American adults are likely too innumerate to operate effectively in financial and health environments. Two numeric competencies conceivably matter-objective numeracy (ability to "run the numbers" correctly; like literacy but with numbers) and numeric self-efficacy (confidence that provides engagement and persistence in numeric tasks). We reasoned, however, that attaining objective numeracy's benefits should depend on numeric confidence. Specifically, among the more objectively numerate, having more numeric confidence (vs. less) should lead to better outcomes because they persist in numeric tasks and have the skills to support numeric success. Among the less objectively numerate, however, having more (vs. less) numeric confidence should hurt outcomes, as they also persist, but make unrecognized mistakes. Two studies were designed to test the generalizability of this hypothesized interaction. We report secondary analysis of financial outcomes in a diverse US dataset and primary analysis of disease activity among systemic lupus erythematosus patients. In both domains, best outcomes appeared to require numeric calculation skills and the persistence of numeric confidence. "Mismatched" individuals (high ability/low confidence or low ability/high confidence) experienced the worst outcomes. For example, among the most numerate patients, only 7% of the more numerically confident had predicted disease activity indicative of needing further treatment compared with 31% of high-numeracy/low-confidence patients and 44% of low-numeracy/high-confidence patients. Our work underscores that having 1 of these competencies (objective numeracy or numeric self-efficacy) does not guarantee superior outcomes.