REVIEW 1 cited by
Variability in the interpretation of Dutch probability phrases - a risk for miscommunication
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Verbal probability phrases are often used to express estimated risk. In this study, focus was on the numerical interpretation of 29 Dutch probability and frequency phrases, including several complementary phrases to test (a)symmetry in their interpretation. Many of these phrases had not been studied before. The phrases were presented in the context of ordinary situations. The survey was distributed among both statisticians and non-statisticians with Dutch as their native language. The responses from 881 participants showed a large variability in the interpretation of Dutch phrases, and the neutral contexts seemed to have no structural influence. Furthermore, the results demonstrated an asymmetry in the interpretation of Dutch complementary phrases. The large variability of interpretations was found among both statisticians and non-statisticians, and among males and females, however, no structural differences were found between the groups. Concluding, there is a large variability in the interpretation of verbal probability phrases, even within sub-populations. Therefore, verbal probability expressions may be a risk for miscommunication.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Representations of Fact, Fiction and Forecast in Large Language Models: Epistemics and Attitudes
LLMs show limited, task-dependent accuracy at choosing correct epistemic modals and attitude verbs in controlled stories, with better performance on necessity and fact statements than on possibility and belief statements.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.