4 ms·
But they didn’t measure that. They’d have to measure that by showing a bunch of people each sequence and asking “is this random?” Instead, they threw a complexi
by icambron 4y ago
But they didn’t measure that. They’d have to measure that by showing a bunch of people each sequence and asking “is this random?” Instead, they threw a complexity formula at it, which measures some specific thing, but not “other people”
Though perhaps there is a body of existing literature showing that their complexity estimator matches people’s assessment of “randomness”? If so, does it include people over 60?
- baobabKoodaa 4y ago> But they didn’t measure that. That's correct. > They’d have to measure that by showing a bunch of people each sequence and asking “is this random?” Agreed! > Instead, they threw a complexity formula at it, which measures some specific thing, but not “other people” Yep, they botched the study. Nonetheless, the "ask" that you criticized was fine. It explained that the subject should craft a pattern which would appear random to other people, and imo there's nothing wrong with that ask. The mistakes came afterwards.
- icambron 4y agoAlright, fair enough