Just 4% of participants appeared to use prior research to make probability estimates—most seemed to focus on the latest study, ignoring/discounting prior ones, even when they had more statistics classes

Is One Study as Good as Three? College Graduates Seem to Think So, Even if They Took Statistics Classes. m W Burt Thompson et al. Psychology Learning & Teaching, September 25, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725719877590

Abstract: When people interpret the outcome of a research study, do they consider other relevant information such as prior research? In the current study, 251 college graduates read a single brief fictitious news article. The article summarized the findings of a study that found positive results for a new drug. Three versions of the article varied the amount and type of previous research: (a) two prior studies that found the drug did not work, (b) no prior studies of the drug, or (c) two prior studies that found the drug had a positive effect. After reading the article, participants estimated the probability the drug is effective. Average estimates were similar for the three articles, even for participants who reported more statistics experience. Overall, just 4% of participants appeared to use prior research to make probability estimates—most seemed to focus on the latest study, while ignoring or discounting prior studies. Implications for statistics education and reporting are discussed.

Keywords; Statistics education, statistics misconception, base rate neglect

Check also: Political partisans disagreed about the importance of conditional probabilities; highly numerate partisans were more polarized than less numerate partisans

It depends: Partisan evaluation of conditional probability importance. Leaf Van Boven et al. Cognition, Mar 2 2019, https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/03/political-partisans-disagreed-about.html

And: Biased Policy Professionals. Sheheryar Banuri, Stefan Dercon, and Varun Gauri. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 8113. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2017/08/biased-policy-professionals-world-bank.html

And: Dispelling the Myth: Training in Education or Neuroscience Decreases but Does Not Eliminate Beliefs in Neuromyths. Kelly Macdonald et al. Frontiers in Psychology, Aug 10 2017. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2017/08/training-in-education-or-neuroscience.html

And: Wisdom and how to cultivate it: Review of emerging evidence for a constructivist model of wise thinking. Igor Grossmann. European Psychologist, in press. Pre-print: https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2017/08/wisdom-and-how-to-cultivate-it-review.html

And: Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics. Caitlin Drummond and Baruch Fischhoff. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 114 no. 36, pp 9587–9592, https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2017/09/individuals-with-greater-science.html

And: Expert ability can actually impair the accuracy of expert perception when judging others' performance: Adaptation and fallibility in experts' judgments of novice performers. By Larson, J. S., & Billeter, D. M. (2017). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(2), 271–288. https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2017/06/expert-ability-can-actually-impair.html

And: Collective Intelligence for Clinical Diagnosis—Are 2 (or 3) Heads Better Than 1? Stephan D. Fihn. JAMA Network Open. 2019;2(3):e191071, https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2019/03/one-conclusion-that-can-be-drawn-from.html