Numerically expressing uncertainty when talking to the public is fine. It causes people to be less confident in the number itself (as it should), but does not cause people to lose trust in the source of that number.
I’m not aware of the studies done in Britain regarding numeracy, but in the United States, we can safely say based on many studies over the last three decades, of literacy, (which includes numeracy) that peoples abilities to work with numbers itself is a fundamental problem. Using NALS as one of those surveys, we find them more than half of the adults in the United States have low literacy, including working with numbers.
Regarding how well numbers can communicate uncertainty, I can refer to the literature on numbers ability to convey risk accurately. Working with numbers often leaves the reader or user more likely to be influenced by framing effects in our research, we have found that to decode numerical information users, often default to two main strategies; performing a straight calculation or decoding an interpreting the information by translating or coding miracle information into. I think what you were referring to as verbal or prepositional statements. We’ve even found that after the verbal decoding readers can still be confused by what the numbers are re-presenting.
When you combine a public,s abilities in working with numbers with historical , social and culturally embedded contexts of numbers, I think then we could more confidently talk about important states of being such as perceiving risk or perceiving uncertainty
I’m not aware of the studies done in Britain regarding numeracy, but in the United States, we can safely say based on many studies over the last three decades, of literacy, (which includes numeracy) that peoples abilities to work with numbers itself is a fundamental problem. Using NALS as one of those surveys, we find them more than half of the adults in the United States have low literacy, including working with numbers.
Regarding how well numbers can communicate uncertainty, I can refer to the literature on numbers ability to convey risk accurately. Working with numbers often leaves the reader or user more likely to be influenced by framing effects in our research, we have found that to decode numerical information users, often default to two main strategies; performing a straight calculation or decoding an interpreting the information by translating or coding miracle information into. I think what you were referring to as verbal or prepositional statements. We’ve even found that after the verbal decoding readers can still be confused by what the numbers are re-presenting.
When you combine a public,s abilities in working with numbers with historical , social and culturally embedded contexts of numbers, I think then we could more confidently talk about important states of being such as perceiving risk or perceiving uncertainty
All in all, I read your study with interest