Anine Cecilie Riege

Postdoctoral Fellow - Metode, arbeids-, kultur- og sosialpsyk

Email a.c.riege@psykologi.uio.no

Phone +47 22845249

Room NEMKO bygget

Available hours Send me an e-mail

Username

Visiting address Forskningsveien 3A 0373 Oslo

Postal address Postboks 1094 Blindern 0317 Oslo

Other affiliations Institutt for pedagogikk (Student)

Press photo Download business card

Academic Interests

Judgment and decision making
Social psychology
Math Interest (interventions)
Probability judgments
Vaccination decisions (interventions)
Self-determination theory
Additivity neglect
Numeracy
Gender differences in willingness to compete
Eye-tracking
Organizational psychology

Projects

My main project investigates how to increase interest in mathematics, focusing on interventions such as question asking and storytelling. In general, we have a societal problem with a lack of interest in STEM-fields. Many students’ interest in mathematics has a tendency to decline with age during the adolescent years (e.g., Fredricks & Eccles, 2002; Watt, 2004) and our aim is to develop learning activities that trigger situational interest (a temporary state of engagement that arises from students’ reaction toward the immediate learning environment, e.g., Renninger & Su, 2012).

Together with Dr. Karis Moon, we have developed a scale to measure motivation for flu vaccine uptake amongst healthcare professionals (TSRQ-Flu) within the framework of self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000). We are also working on interventions to increase uptake of the flu vaccine, such as using autonomy supportive language.

I am also interested in how people use and understand probabilities focusing on accuracy according to a coherence criterion (judgments are compared to logical, mathematical, or statistical rules, such as the principle of additivity). Together with Professor Kjell Arne Brekke, we investigate the relationship between additivity neglect and ambiguity aversion. We also investigate determinants of additivity neglect (probability estimates for a set of outcomes that exceed 1 or 100%), such as numeracy the effect of answering format, trying to get to the underlying cognitive process using process measures such as eye-tracking.

Together with Dr. Karen Hauge and Dr. Andreas Kotsadam, we are using the epidemiological method to investigate cultural effects on gender differences in willingness to compete and bargaining.

I am also interested in responsibility judgments, and how people react to scientific uncertainty and scientific disagreement.

Students interested in any of these topics are very welcome to contact me.

Higher education and employment history

2019 - Postdoctoral fellow / University of Oslo

2018 – 2019 Scientific Advisor / Frisch Centre

2016 - 2019 Postdoctoral fellow / Kingston University London

2012 - 2016 PhD candidate / University of Oslo

2015 - 2016 Visiting Fulbright Scholar / University of Iowa

2011 - Master of Philosophy in Psychology / University of Oslo

2009 - Bachelor in Psychology / University of Oslo

2009 - Bachelor in Social Anthropology / University of Oslo

2008 - Bachelor of Management / BI Oslo

Hauge, Karen Evelyn; Kotsadam, Andreas & Riege, Anine (2023). CULTURE AND GENDER DIFFERENCES IN WILLINGNESS TO COMPETE. Economic Journal. ISSN 0013-0133. 133(654), p. 2403–2426. doi: 10.1093/ej/uead033.
Hauge, Karen Evelyn; Kotsadam, Andreas & Riege, Anine (2023). Culture and gender differences in willingness to compete. Economic Journal. ISSN 0013-0133. 133(654), p. 2403–2426. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7787990. Show summary
We investigate how culture affects gender differences in willingness to compete in a large pre-registered experiment using an epidemiological approach. Our sample of 1,943 Norwegians with parents born in 59 different countries shows a smaller gender gap in willingness to compete among individuals of more gender-equal ancestries. The difference is driven by women with parents from more gender-equal countries wanting to compete more and men with the same ancestry wanting to compete less. The results are robust to controlling for a large set of factors at the individual, parental and ancestral country levels, indicating that gendered culture shapes competitive preferences.
Riege, Anine & Reber, Rolf (2022). Availability. In Pohl, Rüdiger F. (Eds.), Cognitive illusions, 3rd ed.. Routledge. ISSN 9780367724245. p. 175–190.
Moon, Karis; Riege, Anine ; Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, Amélie & Vallée-Tourangeau, Gaëlle (2021). Development and validation of the treatment self-regulation questionnaire assessing healthcare professionals’ motivation for flu vaccination (TSRQ-Flu). Psychology and Health. ISSN 0887-0446. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2021.1912343.
Moon, Karis; Riege, Anine ; Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, Amélie & Vallée-Tourangeau, Gaëlle (2021). The Moderating Effect of Autonomy on Promotional Health Messages Encouraging Healthcare Professionals’ to Get the Influenza Vaccine. . Journal of experimental psychology. Applied. ISSN 1076-898X. 27(2), p. 187–200. doi: 10.1037/xap0000348.
Riege, Anine H.; Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, Amélie & Vallée-Tourangeau, Gaëlle (2020). Covert eye-tracking: an innovative method to investigate compliance with instructions. Psychological Research. ISSN 0340-0727. doi: 10.1007/s00426-020-01451-9.
Nordbye, Gro Hege Haraldsen; Riege, Anine H. & Teigen, Karl Halvor (2018). Better safe than sorry: Risking irresponsibility by seeking uncertainty. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. ISSN 0894-3257. 31(1), p. 87–99. doi: 10.1002/bdm.2049. Full text in Research Archive
Riege, Anine Cecilie & Teigen, Karl Halvor (2017). Everybody Will Win, and All Must Be Hired: Comparing Additivity Neglect with the Nonselective Superiority Bias. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. ISSN 0894-3257. 30(1), p. 95–106. doi: 10.1002/bdm.1924. Full text in Research Archive
Lone, Jon Anders; Riege, Anine Cecilie; Bjørklund, Roald Arild; Hoff, Thomas & Bjørkli, Cato Alexander (2017). The relationship between the broader environment and the work system in a university setting: a systems approach. Studies in Higher Education. ISSN 0307-5079. 42(1), p. 3–22. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2015.1034259.
Riege, Anine Cecilie; Sulutvedt, Unni & Teigen, Karl Halvor (2014). Format dependent probabilities: An eye-tracking analysis of additivity neglect. Polish Psychological Bulletin. ISSN 0079-2993. 45(1), p. 12–20. doi: 10.2478/ppb-2014-0003. Show summary
When people are asked to estimate the probabilities of uncertain events, they often neglect the additivity principle, which requires that the probabilities assigned to an exhaustive set of outcomes should add up to 100%. Previous studies indicate that additivity neglect is dependent on response format, self-generated probability estimates being more coherent than estimates on rating scales. The present study made use of eye-tracking methodology, recording the movement, frequency and duration of fixations during the solution of ten additivity problems and two control tasks. Participants produced more non-additive estimates in the Scale format than in the Self-generated format. Self-generated estimates also led to longer decision time and a higher number of repeated inspections, suggesting a deliberate comparison process. In contrast, the Scale format seemed to encourage a case-based approach where each outcome is evaluated in isolation.
Riege, Anine H. & Teigen, Karl Halvor (2013). Additivity neglect in probability estimates: Effects of numeracy and response format. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. ISSN 0749-5978. 121(1), p. 41–52. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.11.004. Show summary
When people are asked to estimate the probabilities for an exhaustive set of more than two events, they often produce probabilities that add up to more than 100%. Potential determinants for such additivity neglect are explored in four experiments. Additive responses vary between experimental conditions, mainly as a result of response format, with a scale format leading to fewer additive responses than a list format with self-generated, written probabilities. Participants with high numeracy scores produced more additive responses, especially after being primed with a numeracy scale. Additivity neglect for 100% sums appears to be unrelated to other subadditive judgments, like non-additive disjunctions. We conclude that additivity neglect is caused by a case-based approach, which comes natural in real-life situations where the full set of outcomes is not available.
Teigen, Karl Halvor; Juanchich, Marie & Riege, Anine H (2013). Improbable outcomes: Infrequent or extraordinary? Cognition. ISSN 0010-0277. 127(1), p. 119–139. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.12.005. Show summary
Research on verbal probabilities has shown that unlikely or improbable events are believed to correspond to numerical probability values between 10% and 30%. However, building on a pragmatic approach of verbal probabilities and a new methodology, the present paper shows that unlikely outcomes are most often associated with outcomes that have a 0% frequency of occurrence. Five studies provide evidence that when people complete or evaluate statements describing “improbable” outcomes, based on outcome distributions or expected ranges, they favour extraordinary outcomes that have not occurred in the original sample. For quantitative outcomes that can be ordered on a unipolar dimension, an improbable outcome is typically perceived as having a higher outcome value than those observed. Thus when battery life for a sample of laptop batteries is shown to range from 2.5 to 4.5 hours, 5 or 6 hours are considered better examples of “improbable” duration times than those that actually occur in 10% of the cases. Similarly, an improbable exam grade is one that has not yet been observed, rather than one that has been obtained by a small percentage of students. And when climate experts claim that a 100 cm increase in sea level by the year 2100 is “improbable”, participants believe that the same experts’ maximum estimates will be much lower. We conclude that judgments of what is improbable suggest outcomes beyond the expected range, rather than simply low frequency outcomes. These results are compatible with a causal (propensity) interpretation rather than a statistical (frequency) interpretation of probabilities.

View all works in Cristin

Riege, Anine ; Moon, Karis; Vallée-Tourangeau, Gaëlle & Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, Amélie (2021). The role of autonomy in decisions to vaccinate against the flu. .
Reber, Rolf; Riege, Anine & Martinussen, Liva Jenny (2021). Question asking, storytelling, and problem posing as interventions to trigger situational interest and learning in STEM-topics: A user-based approach to intervention-development .
Hauge, Karen Evelyn; Kotsadam, Andreas & Riege, Anine (2020). Culture and gender differences in willingness to compete. .
Riege, Anine H. & Halkjelsvik, Torleif (2019). Communicating scientific disagreement in health policy decisions and its effect on public perception. .
Riege, Anine Cecilie (2015). Comparative processing - How to best evaluate your next vacation destination? Impuls : Tidsskrift for psykologi. ISSN 0801-2911. 68(1), p. 53–59.
Riege, Anine Cecilie; Bjørgfinsdottir, Røskva & Miljeteig, K. (2015). An eye for probabilities: The effect of answering format on Additivity neglect.
Riege, Anine Cecilie & Teigen, Karl Halvor (2015). Everybody will win, and all must be hired:Comparing additivity neglect with the nonselective superiority bias .
Riege, Anine Cecilie & Teigen, Karl Halvor (2014). The relationship between additivity neglect and the nonselective superiority bias.
Riege, Anine Cecilie; Sulutvedt, Unni; Bjørgfinsdottir, Røskva & Teigen, Karl Halvor (2014). An eye-tracking analysis of the effect of answering format on additivity neglect.
Riege, Anine Cecilie; Sulutvedt, Unni & Teigen, Karl Halvor (2013). Additivity neglect of probability estimates: An eye-tracking analysis.

View all works in Cristin

Published May 20, 2019 1:31 PM - Last modified Mar. 20, 2023 9:19 AM

Projects

Question Asking and Storytelling as Means to Increase Mathematics Interest in Teacher Education