WFU Psychology

Eric Stone

Education

	Masters, Applied Statistics, University of Michigan, 1993
	Ph.D., Cognitive Psychology, University of Michigan, 1994

Research interests:

My research is in the field of judgment and decision making, which spans a wide range of areas, from cognitive psychology to social psychology to other disciplines. Broadly, practitioners in the JDM field study both how people should make decisions and how they actually do go about making them. More specifically, my research has focused on a range of applied issues, many of which are related to one of the three areas described below.

Communicating Risk Information

How can we present risk information in a way that will lead to more risk averse behavior? For example, how can we get people to use condoms to help reduce the risk of aids? Through a number of studies, we have documented ways of presenting risk information that appear to be either effective or ineffective. In particular, graphical techniques appear to lead to more risk-avoidant behavior than do non-graphical formats. The major focus of the present work is trying to understand more precisely the mechanism(s) underlying these effects, as well as whether they are due to an increased understanding of the risks involved or to a lack of understanding.

	Stone, E. R., Sieck, W. R., Bull, B. E., Yates, J. F., Parks, S. C., & Rush, C. J. (2003). Foreground: background salience: Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 90 , 19-36.
	Stone, E. R., Yates, J. F., & Parker, A. M. (1997). Effects of numerical and graphical displays on professed risk-taking behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3, 243-256.

Expertise

How do experts differ in decision making from laypeople, how can people be trained to develop this expertise, and what are the effects of varying levels of expertise? Much of our work has focused on different types of expertise, and on how different training procedures have differential effects on the different types. Additionally, a number of our studies have focused in particular on the effects of judgmental expertise (providing well-calibrated, non-overconfident judgments). For example, although being overconfident can produce negative consequences (such as an unwillingness to be open to new information), it can have positive effects as well (such as being viewed as more competent).

	Price, P. C., & Stone, E. R. (2004). Intuitive evaluation of likelihood judgment producers: Evidence for a confidence heuristic. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making , 17 , 39-57.
	Stone, E. R., & Opel, R. B. (2000). Training to improve calibration and discrimination: The effects of performance and environmental feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83, 282-309.

Decision Making for Others vs. for the Self

Do people decide (or advise others) the same way they would make decisions for themselves? We have investigated this issue so far in two contexts: decision making about money, and decision making about relationships. Our research to date suggests that, for financial decision making, the processes are similar; however, for relationships, people tend to be more risk averse than they would advise others to be. Most recently, we have been investigating influences that affect these self-other differences, such as the influence of self-esteem and anxiety.

	Beisswanger, A. H., Stone, E. R., Hupp, J. M., & Allgaier, L. (2003). Risk taking in relationships: Differences in deciding for oneself versus for a friend. Basic and Applied Social Psychology , 25 , 121-135.
	Stone, E. R., Yates, A., & Caruthers, A. S. (2002). Risk taking in decision making for others versus the self. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 32 , 1797-1824.

Scholarly Interests:

	Risk Communication
	Expertise
	Overconfidence
	Self-Other Differences in Decision Making

Courses taught: 

	Decision Making
	Graduate Statistics
	Methods of Psychological Research
	First-Year Seminar on Life Perspectives