= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
FAWS comments on Open Thread, August 2010-- part 2 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (369)
As fas as I understand they operate on different scales. "Used up" effects operate on much shorter time scales, and consistency effects (often?) operate on more specific things than general niceness.
Ah, if so, then thank you. (Huh, I'd thought consistency effects were supposed to work on short time scales too.)
The classic post says effects persist for two weeks, at least. So it would seem that the response curves of the two effects cross each other at one or two points. I'd be interested to see studies plotting them against each other; it is an interesting dichotomy.
Thanks. And yeah, that's a fair point and question. (Hrm... how exactly would one measure the response curves anyways in any quantitative way? ie, sure, "how many people respond after delay X vs delay Y, etc...", but any way to directly measure the strength of the effect rather than simply measuring when it "falls below measurability"?