Cognitive Research:

Context-Dependent Quantitative Judgment

Date: September 2018 - June 2019

Location: University of California, Los Angeles

Role: Research Assistant, Zili Perceptual Processing and Computational Lab

Accolades: UCLA Library Poster Grant

Citation: Kostas, S.C., S., Cui, L., & Liu, Zili (2019, May).Mental Representations of Rational Numbers in a Financial Context. Poster presented at UCLA Research Day, Los Angeles, CA

Citation: Cui, L., Lu, H., & Liu, Z. (in preparation). Magnitude Comparisons of Discounted Prices: Are They Similar to Fractions?Cui, L., Lu, H., & Liu, Z. (in preparation). Magnitude Processing of Improper Fractions in Comparing Bundle Deals

Research Question:

When asked to compare the magnitude of two numbers, people appear to rely on a mental number line to make their judgment. Do participants continue to use a mental number line when in a financial context, rather than a overtly math context?

Process:

We investigated whether people use the same strategy to evaluate the magnitude

of a sale discount, like one you might find in a grocery store, as they would use to

compare the magnitude of fractions. Given a constant reference value, participants were

asked to determine the comparative magnitude of the test value. Sale discounts were

presented in a form analogous to their fraction counter parts: $selling price($suggested

retail value).

Additionally, we examined the affect of format: the discount sales were also presented as bundles (e.g. 9 (for $2)) and the reciprocal( $2(for 9).

Our preliminary results indicated that people are using the same strategy to

evaluate magnitude—albeit, less successfully in a financial context. In both contexts,

people have greater accuracy and a faster reaction time the greater the magnitude

difference between the reference value and the test value. This phenomena indicates that

some kind of mental number line is being used.

Responsibilities:

In addition to running participants and analyzing data for co-variate trends, I was

responsible for piloting the software used to facilitate the experiment. I tested the

software for flow/bugs but also to improve content by identifying confusing components

and potential resolutions for these ambiguities.