Cokely, Edward T.Perrin, Olivia D.2024-05-022024-05-022024-05-10https://hdl.handle.net/11244/340269Numerate people tend to make more informed judgments and decisions because they are more risk literate (i.e., better able to evaluate and understand risk). Do numeracy skills also help people understand regular science reporting from mainstream news sources? To address this question, we investigated responses to regular science reports (e.g., excerpts from CNN health), testing a cognitive model linking numeracy, scientific reasoning, judgment biases, and casual theory errors (i.e., misinterpreting correlational information as causal; Seifert et al., 2022). In Study 1 (n=200), structural equation modeling indicated that numerate people were less likely to exhibit judgment biases because they were better at scientific reasoning, which helped them avoid causal misinterpretations. Study 2 (n=342) cross-validated findings from Study 1, indicating that the link between numeracy and scientific reasoning was also associated with improved cognitive self-assessment (e.g., reduced overconfidence on comprehension judgments). Results suggest numerate people may generally be less likely to confuse correlation and causation in regular science reporting. Results also suggest that numerate people are more likely to have acquired scientific reasoning skills that more generally support risk literacy and knowledge acquisition, consistent with the Knowledge is Power account of Skilled Decision Theory (Cokely et al., 2018). Discussion focuses on implications for risk literacy theory and training, and includes a Risk Literacy Difficulty Analysis indicating that nearly half of the US adult population may be likely to misunderstand common types of regular science reports.NumeracyRisk LiteracyScientific ReasoningCausal Theory Errors