Edward T. Cokely

Edward T. Cokely


Associate Professor of Psychology, Cognitive and Learning Sciences

  • PhD, Psychology, Florida State University, 2007
  • Postdoctoral Fellowship, Max Planck Institute, 2007-2010


Dr. Cokely is Director of Michigan Tech's Decision Science and Decision Engineering Laboratory. He is an expert on the psychology of superior decision making, specializing in assessment and mathematical modeling of individual differences (e.g. cognition, biases, numeracy, traits) and related applications in health, finance, and education (e.g., risk communication, decision support, usability, intelligent tutoring systems). His research has been continuously grant-supported since 2007. He is recipient of a 2013 National Science Foundation CAREER Award and co-recipient of the American Psychological Association's 2012 Raymond S. Nickerson Best Paper Award. Dr. Cokely is also an award winning educator, founder of RiskLiteracy.org, and co-founding faculty of Michigan Tech's Ph.D program in Applied Cognitive Science and Human Factors (2010).

Research Interests

  • Judgment and Decision Making
  • Abilities, Expertise, and Individual Differences
  • Risk Literacy, Numeracy, and Risk Communication
  • Psychometrics and Quantitative Psychology
  • Industrial - Organizational Psychology

Representative Publications

  • Cokely, E.T., Ghazal, S., & Garcia-Retamero, R. (in press). Measuring numeracy. In B. L. Anderson & J. Schulkin (Eds.), Numerical Reasoning in Judgments and Decision Making about Health. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  • Garcia-Retamero, R., Wicki, B., Cokely, E.T., & Hanson, B. (in press). Factors predicting surgeons' preferred and actual roles in interactions with their patients. Health Psychology.
  • Ghazal, S., Cokely, E.T., & Garcia-Retamero, R. (2014). Predicting biases in very highly educated samples: Numeracy and metacognition. Judgment and Decision Making, 9, 15-34. Read More
  • Feltz, A. & Cokely, E.T. (2013). Predicting philosophical disagreement. Philosophy Compass, 8, 978-989.
  • Garcia-Retamero, R., & Cokely, E.T. (2013). Communicating health risks with visual aids. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 392-399.
  • Cokely, E.T., Galesic, M., Schulz, E., Ghazal, S., & Garcia-Retamero, R. (2012). Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test. Judgment and Decision Making, 7, 25-47. Read More
  • Okan, Y., Garcia-Retamero, R., Cokely, E. T., & Maldonado, A. (2012). Individual differences in graph literacy: Overcoming denominator neglect in risk comprehension. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25, 390-401.
  • Garcia-Retamero, R., & Cokely, E.T. (2011). Effective communication of risks to young adults: Using message framing and visual aids to increase condom use and STD screening. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 270-287. Read More
  • Schulz, E., Cokely, E.T., & Feltz, A. (2011). Persistent bias in expert judgments about free will and moral responsibility: A test of the expertise defense. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 4, 1722-1731. Read More
  • Cokely, E.T., & Kelley, C.M. (2009). Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk: A protocol analysis and process model evaluation. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 20-33. Read More
  • Cokely, E.T., & Feltz, A. (2009). Individual differences, judgment biases, and theory-of-mind: Deconstructing the intentional action side effect asymmetry. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 18-24.
  • Cokely, E.T., & Feltz, A. (2009). Adaptive variation in judgment and philosophical intuition. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 355-357. DOI:10.1016/j.concog.2009.01.001
  • Feltz, A., & Cokely, E.T. (2009). Do judgments about freedom and responsibility depend on who you are? Personality differences in intuitions about compatibilism and incompatibilism. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 342-350.
  • Ericsson, K.A., Prietula, M.J., & Cokely, E.T. (2007). The making of an expert. Harvard Business Review, 85, 114-121. Read More
  • Cokely, E.T., Kelley, C.M., & Gilchrist, A.H. (2006). Sources of individual differences in working memory: Contributions of strategy to capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 991-997. Read More