= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
army1987 comments on Don't Get Offended - 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 (588)
You include a copy of the Cognitive Reflection Test or similar in each ballot and weigh votes by the number of correct answers to the test.
(This idea isn't original to me, BTW -- but I can't recall anyone expressing it on the public Internet at the moment.)
This doesn't quite solve the Schelling point problem. You start getting questions about why that particular test and not some other. You will also get problems related to Goodheart's law.
Well... People might ask that about (say) university admission tests, and yet in practice very few do so with a straight face. (OTOH, more people consider voting a sacrosanct right than studying.)
ETA: now that I think about that, this might be way more problematic in a country less culturally homogeneous than mine -- I'm now reminded of complaints in the US that the SAT is culturally biased.
Keeping the choice of questions secret until the election ought to mitigate that.
Also in the US the SAT is only one of the factors effecting admissions.
Only partially. Also what about the people whose design the questions?
High-stakes testing, like the SAT, where voters - I mean, test-takers - have vastly more incentive to cheat, seem to do fine.
Come to think of it, the problem is that the people designing the SAT's have fewer incentives to bias them then people designing the election tests.