| Abstract: | Decision aids often change the representations used to express risk cue information and communicate risk judgments. In this study, we hypothesize that numbers and words may have asymmetric effects when used to represent risk cue information as opposed to when used to communicate risk judgments. Specifically, decision makers' agreement on cue weights and judgment consensus may be higher with cue information stated in words rather than numbers, since appropriately chosen words can more directly convey the risk implications of information cues. In contrast, decision makers' consistency in applying their judgment policies and judgment consensus may be higher with risk judgments communicated in numbers instead of words, because the greater precision available with numbers allows finer discriminations of risk. To test our hypotheses, we conducted an experiment in which experienced financial auditors made inherent risk judgments for a hypothetical manufacturing client. Cue and response representations were manipulated between numbers and words. The results generally support our arguments. In addition, representing cue information in words increased the time required to acquire cue information relative to numeric representation. In contrast, requiring auditors to express their risk judgments in numbers increased the time required to express risk assessments relative to |
