You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

badger comments on Exploiting the Typical Mind Fallacy for more accurate questioning? - Less Wrong Discussion

31 Post author: Xachariah 17 July 2012 12:46AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (72)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: badger 17 July 2012 02:25:51AM *  5 points [-]

Great insight! Unsurprisingly, you're not the first. To my knowledge though, this method doesn't have a standard name and isn't prevalent. Predictions about others might give more information, but are still manipulable and hard to interpret when comparing respondents to each other. Did this person say lots of others cheat because they cheat or because they are bad with probabilities?

Alternatively, if you have a question with a single underlying answer, predictions about opinions are potentially useful for filtering out bias. This is the idea behind Prelec's Bayesian truth serum. Respondents maximize their payments from the system by being honest, and the group with the highest average scores tends be correct.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 17 July 2012 07:47:27AM 2 points [-]

Did this person say lots of others cheat because they cheat or because they are bad with probabilities?

Or because they'd spent time around cheaters who talked about it?

I wonder what sort of answer a competent forensic accountant would give.