= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Viliam_Bur comments on Calibrate your self-assessments - LessWrong
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 (117)
Another rating bias: people probably don't use the rating scale uniformly.
I remember reading somewhere that when women rate men online, instead of "nice, medium, ugly" their rating is more like "nice, ugly, ugly" (the median guy is rated disproportionally low).
If this is true, then this bias could be partially corrected if the web would not display "your rating is 4.3 of 10", but rather "your rating is higher than 70% of people in the same category". Or if the site displays global statistics, you can locate yourself in the distribution curve.
You can find that on okCupid's post about attractiveness. Women rate 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium, whereas male ratings are symmetric and fairly normalized.