Reading Group

“Statistics Communication and (in)numeracy” reading group

In this reading group we focus on literature on the wide topic of statistics communication and (in)numeracy. During the fall semester of 2021-2022, meetings will take place online via MS Teams on Tuesdays, 13.00-14.00h. At each meeting, two participants present a scientific article on the topic. The focus is on the research methods and the important findings. Other participants can read these papers as a preparation, but this is not mandatory.

If you would like to join the reading group, please contact me via s.j.w.willems[at]



Speakers and literature:

November 16, 2021

November 9, 2021

Casper Albers:

Ionica Smeets:

October 26,

Saar Hommes:
Hoffmann TC, Del Mar C, Santhirapala R, et al. Teaching clinicians shared decision making and risk communication online: an evaluation study. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine 2021;26:253.
Anne Marthe van der Bles:
Jenkins, S. C., Harris, A. J. L., & Lark, R. M. (2018). Understanding ‘unlikely (20% likelihood)’ or ‘20% likelihood (unlikely)’ outcomes: the robustness of the extremity effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31(4), 572-586.

October 12,

Marije Fagginger Auer: [slides]
Betsch , C., Haase, N., Renkewitz, F., & Schmid, P. (2015). The narrative bias revisited: What drives the biasing influence of narrative information on risk perceptions? Judgment and Decision Making, 10, 241-264 

Ruben Vromans: [slides]
- Fagerlin, A., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., & Ubel, P. A. (2007). “If I’m better than average, then I’m ok?”: Comparative information influences beliefs about risk and benefits. Patient education and counseling, 69(1-3), 140-144. 
- Schwartz, P. H. (2016). Comparative Risk: Good or Bad Heuristic?. The American Journal of Bioethics, 16(5), 20-22. 

September 28,


September 14, 2021
Winnifred Wijnker:
Cokely, E. T., Galesic, M., Schulz, E., Ghazal, S., & Garcia-Retamero, R. (2012). Measuring risk literacy: the berlin numeracy test. Judgment and Decision making.
Sanne Willems
Bruine de Bruin, W., & Carman, K. G. (2012). Measuring risk perceptions: what does the excessive use of 50% mean?. Medical decision making: an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 32(2), 232–236.

June 25, 2021

June 11, 2021
Anne Marthe van der Bles:
Dieckmann, Gregory, Peters & Hartmann, 2017 "Seeing What You Want to See: How Imprecise Uncertainty Ranges Enhance Motivated Reasoning"
Zsuzsa Bakk Bunga Citra Pratiwi:
Naik, G., Ahmed, H., & Edwards, A. G. (2012). Communicating risk to patients and the public. British Journal of General Practice, 62(597), 213-216.

May 28, 2021

May 14, 2021

Ascension Day

April 30, 2021

Nikky van Buuren:
Fischhoff B. Communicating about the risks of terrorism (or anything else). Am Psychol. 2011 Sep;66(6):520-31. doi: 10.1037/a0024570. PMID: 21823780.

Laura Verbeek Winnifred Wijnker:
Raschke, R. L., & Steinbart, P. J. (2008). Mitigating the effects of misleading graphs on decisions by educating users about the principles of graph design. Journal of Information Systems, 22(2), 23-52.

April 16, 2021

April 2, 2021

Good Friday

March 19, 2021

Ionca Smeets:
Romano, Alessandro, Sotis, Chiara, Dominioni, Goran, & Guidi, Sebastián. (2020). The scale of COVID‐19 graphs affects understanding, attitudes, and policy preferences. Health Economics, 29(11), 1482-1494.
Nynke Krol:
Porter, Theodore M. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton University Press, 1995. JSTOR

March 5, 2021

Winnifred Wijnker: 

Okan, Y., Galesic, M. & Garcia-Retamero, R. How People with Low and High Graph Literacy Process Health Graphs: Evidence from Eye-tracking: Graph Literacy and Health Graph Processing. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 29, 271–294 (2016)

Sanne Willems:
Innumeracy in the Wild - Misunderstanding and Misusing Numbers, Ellen Peters (2020) – book, part 1 and 2