The main aim of this study is to replicate the effect shown by Traczyk et al. (2018), where individuals with higher statistical numeracy, compared to individuals with lower statistical numeracy, employed a more effortful choice strategy when outcomes were meaningful. I hypothesize that participants with higher numeracy will be more likely to make choices predicted by Cumulative Prospect Theory and Expected Value theory (CPT/EV) in high-payoff problems than in low-payoff problems. Data collection was done online by appointing 73 participants. Participants’ preference, fluid intelligence, objective and subjective numeracy were measured using thirteen high and eleven low payoff choice problems, International Cognitive Ability Resource (ICAR), Berlin Numeracy Test (BNT), and Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS), respectively. All the measures mentioned above were presented randomly. Results showed that all participants, in high-payoff condition, on average maximized EV; however, participants with high BNT scores were more likely to make choices consistent with CPT/EV predictions than individuals with low BNT scores. Furthermore, compared to less numerate participants, highly numerate participants were less likely to make choices consistent with CPT/EV predictions in low-payoff condition. Highly numerate individuals
adjusted their choice strategy by modulating their response time, indicating
their discernible sensitivity towards large asymmetry in payoff. In conclusion, the effect shown by Traczyk et al. (2018) was successfully replicated.