Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

A review of human linguistic probability processing: General principles and empirical evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2009


Thomas S. Wallsten
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3270, USA
David V. Budescu
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA

Abstract

This article reviews research on how people use and understand linguistic expressions of uncertainty, with a view toward the needs of researchers and others interested in artificial intelligence systems. We discuss and present empirical results within an inductively developed theoretical framework consisting of two background assumptions and six principles describing the underlying cognitive processes.


Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Anderson, NH, 1991. Information Integration Theory, Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bass, BM, Cascio, WF and O'Connor, EJ. 1974. “Magnitude estimation of expressions of frequency and amountJournal of Applied Psychology 59 313320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behn, RD and Vaupel, JW, 1982. Quick Analysis for Busy Decision Makers, Basic.Google Scholar
Beyth-Marom, R, 1982. “How probable is probable? A numerical translation of verbal probability expressionsJournal of Forecasting 1 257269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonissone, PP and Decker, KS, 1987. “Selecting uncertainty calculi and granularity: An experiment in trading off precision and complexity” In: Kanal, LN and Lemmer, JF (eds.), Uncertainty and Artificial Intelligence, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Bortolan, G and Degani, R, 1985. “A review of some methods for ranking fuzzy subsetsFuzzy Sets and Systems 15 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brackner, JW, 1985. “How to report contingent losses in financial statements?Journal of Business Forecasting 4 1318.Google Scholar
Bradburn, NM and Miles, C, 1979. “Vague quantifiersPublic Opinion Quarterly 43 92101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brun, W and Teigen, KH, 1988. “Verbal probabilities: Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both?Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 41 390404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryant, and Norman, , 1980. “Expressions of probability: Words and NumbersNew England Journal of Medicine 302 411.Google ScholarPubMed
Budescu, DV and Wallsten, TS, 1985. “Consistency in interpretation of probabilistic phrasesOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 36 391405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budescu, DV and Wallsten, TS 1987. “Subjective estimation of precise and vague uncertainties In: Wright, G and Ayton, P. (eds.), Judgmental Forecasting, pp 6381, Wiley.Google Scholar
Budescu, DV and Wallsten, TS, 1990. “Dyadic decisions with verbal and numerical probabilitiesOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 46 240263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budescu, DV and Wallsten, TS (in press). “Processing linguistic probabilities: general principles and empirical evidence” In: Busemeyer, JR, Hastie, R and Medin, DL (eds.), Decision Making from the Perspective of Cognitive Psychology, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Budescu, DV, Weinberg, S and Wallsten, TS, 1988. “Decisions based on numerically and verbally expressed uncertaintiesJournal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 14 281294.Google Scholar
Budescu, DV, Zwick, R, Wallsten, TS and Erev, I, 1990. “Integration of linguistic probabilitiesInternational Journal of Man–Machine Studies 33 657676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camerer, C and Weber, M, 1992. “Recent developments in modeling preferences: Uncertainty and ambiguityJournal of Risk and Uncertainty 5 325370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesley, GR, 1985. “Interpretation of uncertainty expressionsContemporary Accounting Research 2 179199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, DA, 1990. “Verbal uncertainty expressions: A review of two decades of researchCurrent Psychology: Research and Reviews 9 203235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, VA, Ruffin, CL, Hill, DJ and Beamen, AL, 1992. “Ratings of orally presented verbal expressions of probability by a heterogeneous sampleJournal of Applied Social Psychology 22 638656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cliff, N, 1959. “Adverbs as multipliersPsychological Review 66 2744.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, BL and Wallsten, TS, 1992. “The effect of constant outcome value on judgments and decision making given linguistic probabilitiesJournal of Behavioral Decision Making 5 5372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curley, SP and Yates, JF, 1985. “The center and range of the probability interval as factors affecting ambiguity preferencesOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 36 273287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degani, R and Bortolan, G, 1988. “The problem of linguistic approximation in clinical decision makingInternational Journal of Approximate Reasoning 2 143162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeGroot, MH, 1970. Optimal Statistical Decisions, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Einhorn, HJ and Hogarth, RM, 1985. “Ambiguity and uncertainty in probabilistic inferencePsychological Review 92 433461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellsberg, D, 1961. “Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axiomsQuarterly Journal of Economics 75 643669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erev, I and Cohen, BL, 1990. “Verbal versus numerical probabilities: Efficiency, biases, and the preference paradoxOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 45 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erev, I, Wallsten, TS and Budescu, DV, 1994. “Simultaneous over- and underconfidence: The role of error in judgment processesPsychological Review 101 519527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erev, I, Wallsten, TS and Neal, M, 1991. “Vagueness, ambiguity, and the cost of mutual understandingPsychological Science 2 321324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farkas, A and Makai-Csasar, M, 1988. “Communication or dialogue of deafs: Pitfalls of use of fuzzy quantifiers” In: Second Network Seminar of the International Union of Psychological Science, North- Holland.Google Scholar
Fillenbaum, S, Wallsten, TS, Cohen, B and Cox, JA, 1991. “Some effects of vocabulary and communication task on the understanding and use of vague probability expressionsAmerican Journal of Psychology 104 3560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gärdenfors, P and Sahlin, NE, 1982. “Unreliable probabilities, risk taking, and decision makingSynthese 53 361386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González-Vallejo, CC, Erev, I and Wallsten, TS, 1994. “Do decision quality and preference order depend on whether probabilities are verbal or numerical?American Journal of Psychology 107 157172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González-Vallejo, CC and Wallsten, TS, 1992. “Effects of probability mode on preference reversalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, ' Cognition 18 855864.Google ScholarPubMed
Grether, DM and Plott, CR, 1979. “Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenonAmerican Economic Review 69 623638.Google Scholar
Hamm, RM, 1991. “Selection of verbal probabilities: A solution for some problems of verbal probability expressionOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 48 193223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammerton, M, 1976. “How much is a large part?Applied Ergonomics 7 1012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holyoak, KJ, 1978. “Comparative judgments with numerical reference pointsCognitive Psychology 10 203243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holyoak, KJ and Glass, AL, 1978. “Recognition confusions among quantifiersJournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17 249264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaffe-Katz, A, Budescu, DV and Wallsten, TS, 1989. “Timed magnitude comparisons of numerical and nonnumerical expressions of uncertaintyMemory and Cognition 17 249264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, EM, 1973. “Numerical encoding of qualitative expressions of uncertainty” (Tech. paper No. 250), U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.Google Scholar
Johnson, EM and Huber, GP, 1977. “The technology of utility assessment IEEE Translations oil Systems, Man and Cybernetics 7 311325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kadane, JB, 1990. “Comment: Codifying chanceStatistical Science 5 1820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keynes, JM, 1921. A Treatise on Probability, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Knight, FH, 1921. Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kong, A, Barnett, GO, Mosteller, F and Youtz, C, 1986. “How medical professionals evaluate expressions of probabilityThe New England Journal of Medicine 315 740744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtenstein, S, Fischhoff, B and Phillips, LD, 1982. “Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980” In: Kahneman, D, Slovic, P and Tversky, A (eds.), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, pp 306334, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtenstein, S and Newman, JR, 1967. “Empirical scaling of common verbal phrases associated with numerical probabilitiesPsychonomic Science 9 563564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López de Mántaras, R, Meseguer, P, Sanz, F, Sierra, C and Verdaguer, A, 1988. “A fuzzy logic approach to the management of linguistically expressed uncertainty” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and cybernetics 144151.Google Scholar
Krause, P and Clark, D, 1993. Representing Uncertain Knowledge: An artificial intelligence approach, Intellect.Google Scholar
Mapes, , 1979. “Verbal and numerical estimates of probability termsJournal of General Internal Medicine 6 237.Google Scholar
Marshall, E, 1986. “Feynman issues his own shuttle report, attacking NASA's risk estimatesScience 232 1596.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, E, 1988. “Academy panel faults NASA's safety analysisScience 239 1233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merz, JF, Druzdzel, MJ and Mazur, DJ, 1991. “Verbal expressions of probability in informed consent litigationJournal of Medical Decision Making 11 273281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, PG, 1977. “The manager's struggle with uncertaintyJournal of the Royal Statistical Society 140 129165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, PG and Thomas, H, 1975. “Measuring uncertaintyThe International Journal of Managememu Science 3 657.Google Scholar
Mosier, CI, 1941. “A psychometric study of meaningJournal of Social Psychology 39 3136.Google Scholar
Mosteller, F and Youtz, C, 1990. “Quantifying probabilistic expressionsStatistical Science 5 216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moxey, LM and Sanford, AJ, 1993. Communicating Quantities: A Psychological Perspective, Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mullet, E, and Rivet, I, 1991. “Comprehension of verbal probability expressions in children and adolescentsLanguage and Communication 11 217225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, AH and Brown, BG, 1983. “Forecast terminology: Composition and interpretation of public weather forecastsBulletin of tile American Meteorological Society 64 1322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, AH, Lichtenstein, S, Fischhoff, B and Winkler, RL, 1980. “Misinterpretations of precipitation probability forecastsBulletin of the American Meteorological Society 61 695701.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakao, and Axelrod, , 1983. “Numbers are better than words: Verbal specifications of frequency have no place in medicineAmerican Journal of Medicine 74 1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Weather Service, 1984. Weather Service Operations Manual. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.Google Scholar
Newstead, SE, 1988. “Quantifiers as fuzzy concepts” In: Zetenyl, T (eds.), Fuzzy Sets in Psychology, pp 5172, Elsevier Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norwich, AM and Turksen, IB, 1984. “A model for the measurement of membership and the consequences of its empirical implementationFuzzy Sets and Systems 12 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parciucci, A, 1968. “How often is oftenAmerican Psychologist 23 828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pepper, S, 1981. “Problems in the quantification of frequency expression” In: Fiske, DW (ed.), New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science Jossey- Bass.Google Scholar
Pepper, S and Prytulak, LS, 1974. “Sometimes frequently means seldom: Context effects in the interpretation of quantitative expressions Journal of Research in Personality 8 95101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rapoport, A, Wallsten, TS and Cox, JA, 1987. “Direct and indirect scaling of membership functions of probability phrasesMathematical Modelling 9 397417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rapoport, A, Wallsten, TS, Erev, I and Cohen, BL, 1990. “Revision of opinion with verbally and numerically expressed uncertaintiesActa Psychologica 74 6179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reagan, RT, Mosteller, F and Youtz, C, 1989. “Quantitative meanings of verbal probability expressionsJournal of Applied Psychology 74 433442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reyna, VF, 1981. “The language of possibility and probability: Effects of negation on meaningMemory ' Cognition 9 642650.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rubin, DC, 1979. “On measuring fuzziness: A comment on 'a fuzzy set approach to modifiers and vagueness in natural languageJournal of Experimeiital Psychology: General 108 486489.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schkade, DA and Kleinmuntz, DN, 1994. “Information displays and choice processes: Differential effects of organization, form, and sequenceOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 57 319337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, AJ and Wallsten, TS, 1994. “Base rate effects on interpreting verbally and numerically communicated probabilities” Working paper.Google Scholar
Simpson, RH, 1944. “The specific meanings of certain terms indicating differing degrees of frequency Quarterly Journal of Speech 30 328330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, DN and Schkade, DA, 1991. “Numeric and linguistic information representation in multiattribute choiceOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 49 4259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherland, HJ, Lockwood, GA, Tritchler, DL and Scm, F, 1991. “Communicating probabilistic information to cancer patients: Is there ‘noise’ on the line?Social Science and Medicine 32 725731.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Svenson, O and Karlson, G, 1986. “Attractiveness of decision alternatives characterized by numerical and non-numerical information Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 27 7484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teigen, KH, 1988a. “When are low-probability events judged to be ‘probable’? Effects of outcome-set characteristics on verbal probability estimatesA cta Psychologica 67 157174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teigen, KH, 1988b. “The language of uncertaintyAda Psychologica 68 2738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teigen, KH and Brun, W, 1993. “Yes, but it is uncertain: Direction and communicative intention of verbal probabilistic terms” SPUDM-14, Aix-en Provence, France.Google Scholar
Tsao, CJ and Wallsten, TS, 1994. “Effects of the number of outcomes on the interpretation and selection of verbal and numerical probabilities in dyadic decisions”. Working paper.Google Scholar
Tversky, A, Sattath, S and Slovic, P, 1988. “Contingent weighting in judgment and choicePsychological Review 95 371384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vesely, WE and Rasmuson, DM, 1984. “Uncertainties in nuclear probabilistic risk analysisRisk Analysis 4 313322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von, Winterfeldt D and Edwards, W, 1986. Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wallsten, TS, 1971. “Subjectively expected utility theory and subjects' probability estimates: Use of measurement-free techniquesJournal of Experimental Psychology 88 3140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallsten, TS, 1990. “Measuring vague uncertainties and understanding their use in decision making” In: Furstenberg, GM von (ed.), Acting under Uncertainty pp 377398, Kluwer.Google Scholar
Wallsten, TS, Budescu, DV and Erev, I, 1988. “Understanding and using linguistic uncertaintiesActa Psychologica 68 3952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallsten, TS, Budescu, DV, Rapoport, A, Zwick, R and Forsyth, BH, 1986. “Measuring the vague meanings of probability termsJournal of Experimental Psychology: General 115 348365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallsten, TS, Budescu, DV and Tsao, CJ, 1994. “Combining linguistic probabilities” Symposiumn on Qualitative Aspects of Decision Making, Regensburg, Germany, 07 20 1994.Google Scholar
Wallsten, TS, Budescu, DV and Zwick, R, 1993. “Comparing the calibration and coherence numerical and verbal probability judgmentsManagement Science 39 176190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallsten, TS, Budescu, DV, Zwick, R and Kemp, SM, 1993. “Preference and reasons for communicating probabilistic information in numerical or verbal termsBulletin of the Psychonomnic Society 31 135138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallsten, TS, Filenbaum, S and Cox, JA, 1986. “Base rate effects on the interpretations of probability and frequency expressionsJournal of Memory and Language 25 571587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, EU, 1988. “A descriptive measure of riskActa Psychologica 69 185203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, EU and Bottom, WP, 1989. “Axiomatic measures of perceived risk: Some tests and extensionsJournal of Behavioral Decision Making 2 113131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webber, EU and Hilton, DJ, 1990Contextual effects in the interpretations of probability words: Perceived base rate and severity of eventsJournal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 16 781789.Google Scholar
Wright, GN, Phillips, LD, Whalley, PC, Choo, GT, Ng, KO, Tan, I and Wisudha, A, 1978. “Cultural differences in probabilistic thinkingJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 9 285299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyden, P, 1979. Bay of Pigs, Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Yager, RR, 1981. “A procedure for ordering fuzzy sets on the unit intervalInformation Sciences 24 143161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, JF, Zhu, Y, Ronis, DL, Wang, DF, Shinotsuka, H and Toda, M, 1989. “Probability judgment accuracy: China, Japan, and the United StatesOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 43 145171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmer, AC, 1983. “Verbal vs. numerical processing of subjective probabilities” In: RW, Scholz (ed.), Decision Making Under Uncertainty, Elsevier.Google Scholar
Zwick, R, 1987. “Combining stochastic uncertainty and linguistic inexactness: Theory kind experimental evaluation”. Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Zwick, R, Budescu, DV and Wallsten, TS, 1988. “An empirical study of the integration of linguistic probabilities” In: Zetenyi, T (ed.), Fuzzy Set Theory in Psychology, pp 91125, North Holland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwick, R, Carlstein, E and Budescu, DV, 1987. “Measures of similarity among fuzzy concepts: A comparative analysisInternational Journal of Approximate Reasoning 1 221242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwick, R and Wallsten, TS, 1989. “Combining stochastic and linguistic inexactness: Theory and experimental evaluation of four fuzzy probability modelsInternational Journal of Man–Machine Studies 30 69111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altmetric attention score


Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 114 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 4th December 2020. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-b4dcdd7-ppfm2 Total loading time: 0.72 Render date: 2020-12-04T08:50:43.888Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags last update: Fri Dec 04 2020 07:59:30 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) Feature Flags: { "metrics": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "peerReview": true, "crossMark": true, "comments": true, "relatedCommentaries": true, "subject": true, "clr": false, "languageSwitch": true }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

A review of human linguistic probability processing: General principles and empirical evidence
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

A review of human linguistic probability processing: General principles and empirical evidence
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

A review of human linguistic probability processing: General principles and empirical evidence
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *