Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Forgive my ignorance - why wouldn't, "I'm average," not be an option? For multiple questions, I found myself feeling neither more nor less than average.



The problem with having such options in surveys is that everyone then picks it, even though it is statistically unlikely. So better to force them to make a decision instead.


I think four bins of below average, slightly below average, slightly above average, and above average would be reasonable. It would show how many people think they fit into the interquartile range versus the extremities.


But then it will just take longer. You'll still have to pick which side of the average you're on, plus how extreme (or maybe you'll just never pick the extreme).


I gave up at question 60 because it was taking too long.


I have the same issue with most of the popular personality tests. Many of my responses are either extremely neutral or could wildly swing depending on the week, month, year, etc.


Think of it as a bet. There's no harm in picking either above or below average when you're uncertain into which bin you'll fall, because those cases will even out in the end anyway. Sometimes you'll chose "below average" and actually be 0.1 standard deviations above average. Others will be the other way around, but for your return on investment those cases are not the ones that matter.

In fact, if there was a third "within +-0.3 standard deviations of average" you would probably be unwise to pick it, simply because "below average" has a greater expected value due to covering more of the range of possibilities, even when it's only true 50 % of the time.

Besides, being forced to really try to sense which way one leans is informative!


Also things like “better partner” are so conditional on who you partner with that a simple general better vs. worse decision seems impossible to answer in a meaningful way.


Maybe choosing a partner that will be happy with you is also part of being a good partner?


For a continuously measured variable like height or attractiveness or curiosity measured at arbitrary precision, your probability of being average is 0.


Average being -1 to 1 sigma, most people are just average.


> measured at arbitrary precision, your probability of being average is 0

You're talking about a site that currently measures with precision of 1 bit, in which case your probability of being average is basically 100% comparing to either extreme.


If you force someone, you truly measure them.


This. I closed out of the quiz when I saw that I couldn't answer "close to average, and without enough certainty or precision to guess above or below".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: