Main Focus
- Decision making under risk and uncertainty
- Risk communication
- Numeracy
- Computational modeling
Curriculum Vitae
- since 2021: Postdoctoral Fellow, Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development
- 2019–2020: Visiting Researcher, Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development
- 2017–2022: PhD in Psychology, Graduate School of Decision Sciences, University of Konstanz
- 2016–2017: Visiting Scholar, Cognitive and Affective Influences in Decision Making Lab, Ohio State University, USA
- 2014–2017: MSc in Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau
- 2011–2014: BSc in Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau
Scholarships
- PhD Scholarship of the German Academic Scholarship Foundation (Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes)
- Study Scholarship of the German Academic Scholarship Foundation (Studienstiftung des deutschen Volkes)
Selected Publications
- Tiede, K. E., & Gaissmaier, W. (2023). How do people process different representations of statistical information? Insights into cognitive effort, representational inconsistencies, and individual differences. Medical Decision Making, 43, 803–820. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X231202505
- Tiede, K. E., Henninger, F., & Kieslich, P. J. (2022). Revisiting the Open Sampling format: Improving risky choices through a novel graphical representation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29, 648–659. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02018-4
- Tiede, K. E., Bjälkebring, P., & Peters, E. (2022). Numeracy, numeric attention, and number use in judgment and choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 35(3), e2264. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2264
- Tiede, K. E., Ripke, F., Degen, N., & Gaissmaier, W. (2020). When does the incremental risk format aid informed medical decisions? The role of learning, feedback, and number of treatment options. Medical Decision Making, 40, 212–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X20904357
- Peters, E., Fennema, M. G., & Tiede, K. E. (2019). The loss-bet paradox: Actuaries, accountants, and other numerate people rate numerically inferior gambles as superior. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 32, 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2085