• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 16:36
CEST 22:36
KST 05:36
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL22] Ro24 Preview: Siren's Call8[ASL22] Ro24 Preview: Summer's End9Serral wins HomeStory Cup 2915Serral wins Maestros of the Game 244ByuL, and the Limitations of Standard Play3
Community News
Official StarCraft website teases new content ahead of BlizzCon?59Stellar Fest TWO the Moon (Dec 16-20)8Weekly Cups (August 24-30): Patches' balance mod takes over3New 3v3 BGH Ladder (and more) on ShieldBattery!40Weekly Cups (August 17-23): Zerg dominate the week6
StarCraft 2
General
SC4ALL: II Winner Will Earn a Spot at HSC 30! Nexon wins bid to develop StarCraft IP content, distribute Overwatch mobile game Weekly Cups (August 24-30): Patches' balance mod takes over Balance hotfix patch 5.0.16b (July 16) September World Ranking: herO leads, Serral climbs
Tourneys
IntoTheTV X SOOP SC2 League : Weekly & Monthly SC2 INu's Battles#20 [BO.9] 2026 GSTL Announcement Stellar Fest TWO the Moon (Dec 16-20) PIG STY FESTIVAL 8.0! (13 - 23 August)
Strategy
[G] Having the right mentality to improve
Custom Maps
Nexus Wars 2021 GUIDE [M] (2) Industrial Park
External Content
Mutation # 541 Binary Choice The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 540 Dodge This Mutation # 539 Thunder Dome
Brood War
General
Official StarCraft website teases new content ahead of BlizzCon? BW General Discussion ASL22 General Discussion [Personal Project Share] Terran Defense v0.60 BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/
Tourneys
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 3 Brood War in Budapest ! WORTEX 2026 BW Finals [Megathread] Daily Proleagues BSL LAN Party - Kraków 29-30 August - OPEN SIGNUPS
Strategy
Replay Review Process - What do you do? Game Theory for Starcraft Odyssey Mineral Stack Saturation Fighting Spirit mining rates
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Diablo IV EVE Corporation [Maplestory Hardcore] Let's Play~!! General RTS Discussion Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
[TL LoL EUW IHs] Teemo shall perish TSM pausing esports and CLG Dead
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Power Rank TL Mafia Community Thread NeO.D_StephenKing vs This Guy From 1 Million Dance
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Artificial Intelligence Thread UK Politics Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
MarineLorD Fan Club The Creator Fan Club The ShoWTimE Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! Anime Discussion Thread
Sports
Football (Soccer) Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 MLB/Baseball 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List Northern Ireland Global Starcraft
Blogs
Dreaming of BW patches (mod…
c3rberUs
Regacy Esports: The Bh…
regacyesports
Violent Games and Crime Rate…
TrAiDoS
LOCKPICKING NOOB
LUCKY_NOOB
Cathedral Of CS And NY pizza a…
FuDDx
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 4144 users

Smarter people more prone to cognitive bias - Page 5

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16 17 18 Next All
hacpee
Profile Joined November 2007
United States752 Posts
June 13 2012 06:08 GMT
#81
The paper does have a point that sometimes, people aren't careful. A lot of times, a problem may seem simple at a high level, but there is additional complexity once you dive deeper. If you don't take the time to sit down and understand it, you will be wrong.
Severedevil
Profile Blog Joined April 2009
United States4839 Posts
June 13 2012 06:10 GMT
#82
A smart person who expects to solve a question quickly may be more easily taken in by deliberate trickery, yes. However, if you point out the error/trick, they should quickly understand and correct what they did wrong.
My strategy is to fork people.
Punscho
Profile Joined January 2011
70 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-06-13 14:13:04
June 13 2012 06:11 GMT
#83
On June 13 2012 14:41 SipNanana wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 13 2012 14:09 Artemis_ wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:06 SipNanana wrote:
can someone please explain these?

Bat + Ball = $1.10 (ok)
Bat = Ball + $1 (ok)
=> (Ball +1) + Ball = 1.10 (no..... ball + $1 = bat + ball) no where did it say if you buy 2 balls and add a dollar it equals $1.10
Ball + Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
2Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
Ball = $.05 (now irrelevant)


Ball = X
Bat = X + 1.00
X+ (X + 1.00) = 1.10
2X = .10 (If you do not understand how I got here, then well... idk what to say)
X = .05


my problem with this is;
let's say we know the ball costs 10cents, using your formula to prove it.


If we know the ball costs 10 cents we have no unknown X for his equation. If we would tackle it using logic it would also make either the premise P1: Ball + Bat = 1.10 false or the premise P2: Bat = Ball + 1.00 false.
Rarak
Profile Joined May 2010
Australia631 Posts
June 13 2012 06:16 GMT
#84
5 cents.
SipNanana
Profile Joined June 2012
Australia8 Posts
June 13 2012 06:19 GMT
#85
On June 13 2012 15:11 Punscho wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 13 2012 14:41 SipNanana wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:09 Artemis_ wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:06 SipNanana wrote:
can someone please explain these?

Bat + Ball = $1.10 (ok)
Bat = Ball + $1 (ok)
=> (Ball +1) + Ball = 1.10 (no..... ball + $1 = bat + ball) no where did it say if you buy 2 balls and add a dollar it equals $1.10
Ball + Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
2Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
Ball = $.05 (now irrelevant)


Ball = X
Bat = X + 1.00
X+ (X + 1.00) = 1.10
2X = .10 (If you do not understand how I got here, then well... idk what to say)
X = .05


my problem with this is;
let's say we know the ball costs 10cents, using your formula to prove it.


If we know the ball costs 10 cents we have no unknown X for his equation. If we would tackle it using logic it would also make either the premise P1: Ball + Bat = 1.10 false or the premise P2: Bat + 1.00 = Ball false.


so you're saying the question is wrong not the price of the ball? Equations should work backwards

If you're not first, you're last..
RoKetha
Profile Joined July 2010
United States211 Posts
June 13 2012 06:23 GMT
#86
I really wish there were more example problems, because those problems were both easy enough to get in a couple of seconds, and I arrived at the correct answers. I did first guess $1.00 and $0.10 for the prices of the bat and ball, but it was just a stepping stone since seeing that the difference is 90 cents and adjusting by 5 cents (half of the remaining difference needed) in each direction is faster for me than doing out the algebra. Those examples suggest that smart people don't properly read or frame the problems or something.
Apex
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
United States7227 Posts
June 13 2012 06:24 GMT
#87
Damn, I said ten cents. :<

Rarak
Profile Joined May 2010
Australia631 Posts
June 13 2012 06:28 GMT
#88
Tbh I doubt this research. It's based on a relatively small sample.

For another small sample size to dispute the research - I consider myself pretty smart and got both questions right within 5 or so seconds.
kubiks
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
France1328 Posts
June 13 2012 06:28 GMT
#89
I don't know what's in the study but the 2 exposed questions are particulary unimpressive...
The lotus thing is like the most classic tricky question in the book (I already saw it a lot of time), why the ball question is just classic (with other values etc).
What else was in this study ? Did they just put all the classic tricky questions ? They could have added : "we take a product that cost 100$, make a 10% increase, then a 20% reduction, what is the final prize of the product ?" (hint : it's not 90$)

Because for now I don't know how "intelligent people" would get tricked by questions that they already encountered a lot of time
Juanald you're my hero I miss you -> best troll ever on TL <3
TheRealPaciFist
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States1049 Posts
June 13 2012 06:29 GMT
#90
Kinda surprised that people would answer 24 days.

As for the study: maybe more "intelligence" > more arrogance > less time spent thinking > worse answers?
Second favorite strategy game of all time: Starcraft. First: Go (aka Wei Qi, Paduk, or Igo)
numLoCK
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
Canada1416 Posts
June 13 2012 06:29 GMT
#91
I can't help but question the validity of this study. Both questions were extremely easy. I mean, with the lily pad question you have to ignore just about everything stated in the question in order to answer it incorrectly.
Release
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States4397 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-06-13 06:31:26
June 13 2012 06:30 GMT
#92
i am mental retard.

5cents
☺
Crazy Eddie
Profile Joined July 2011
United States128 Posts
June 13 2012 06:33 GMT
#93

Method
Participants. The participants were 482 undergraduate students
(122 men, 360 women) from a medium-sized, eastern university
recruited through an introductory psychology subject pool.


Not having access to this either I still really question the methodology and how the authors established a correlation. What we know so far is a mention of self-reported scores and a questionable sample. Look at that sex ratio.

Most importantly, this "Cognitive Reflection Test," the exact same three mathematical questions, has been used before in several other studies. The results contradict this claim.

Students at better universities with more stringent admissions criteria and higher test scores, performed much better than students at weaker universities. People with better performance on other mathematical and cognitive metrics, given in the same sitting, performed better on the CRT questions. iirc students with higher GPAs were found to perform better on the CRT in one study as well. It's possible to suppose the individuals involved in this study were particularly stupid or say similar disparaging things, but if the authors didn't even address the above it's a terrible job on their parts. The finding that people who self-report "being smart" are more prone to bias doesn't appear to be well established by this one study, let alone any broader claims.
When the scv came down to a patch of new resources without a destructable rock in sight, he proclaimed, "What possibilities!"
Omnidroid
Profile Joined November 2011
New Zealand214 Posts
June 13 2012 06:37 GMT
#94
Lol, the questions just needed to be read fully and carefully. Reminded me of the time when one of my teachers gave the class a 'test'. It basically had on it all these random tasks like multiply 4 by 103, take half the answer and triple it, tap on your desk three times etc. Then on the last line of the test it said "Don't do all the things above, and write your name on the top right corner of the paper".
The smartest kid in our class all did the random stuff, before realizing.
Demonhunter04
Profile Joined July 2011
1530 Posts
June 13 2012 06:38 GMT
#95
On June 13 2012 14:55 CraZyWayne wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 13 2012 14:52 Demonhunter04 wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:44 Chiller274 wrote:
There was a study in germany where they tested how people understand text questions. One question was for example: "You have 10 oranges on a boat. On the boat there are 32 passengers. How old is the captain?"

People who have a high education standard answered more often with 42 (~70%) and people with a low education did not answer as much (~30%)

Therefore I don't see how you can really unroll the argument because people are trained to scan through question and just plug the numbers


LMAO if someone actually read the question how would they answer 42? Too many people skim instead of reading, I guess.


There might me a different reason to answer this question with "42". Just saying.


Yeah, I know. That's what came to mind at first, because I doubted anyone would add 10 and 32 from reading that.
"If you don't drop sweat today, you will drop tears tomorrow" - SlayerSMMA
uLaLuLaLume
Profile Joined May 2012
Canada75 Posts
June 13 2012 06:39 GMT
#96
1 + x + x = 1.1, where x = cost of ball in $
2x = 0.1
x = 0.05
Snackysnacks
Profile Joined December 2010
United States411 Posts
June 13 2012 06:44 GMT
#97
On June 13 2012 15:19 SipNanana wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 13 2012 15:11 Punscho wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:41 SipNanana wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:09 Artemis_ wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:06 SipNanana wrote:
can someone please explain these?

Bat + Ball = $1.10 (ok)
Bat = Ball + $1 (ok)
=> (Ball +1) + Ball = 1.10 (no..... ball + $1 = bat + ball) no where did it say if you buy 2 balls and add a dollar it equals $1.10
Ball + Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
2Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
Ball = $.05 (now irrelevant)


Ball = X
Bat = X + 1.00
X+ (X + 1.00) = 1.10
2X = .10 (If you do not understand how I got here, then well... idk what to say)
X = .05


my problem with this is;
let's say we know the ball costs 10cents, using your formula to prove it.


If we know the ball costs 10 cents we have no unknown X for his equation. If we would tackle it using logic it would also make either the premise P1: Ball + Bat = 1.10 false or the premise P2: Bat + 1.00 = Ball false.


so you're saying the question is wrong not the price of the ball? Equations should work backwards


Isnt the question define X, with x + x + 1 = 1.1 Being the general statement
Its still really hard to think anyone can be serious with 10 cents being the ball right. even if so that would make the bat 1.10 (being a dollar more) and the total 1.20(not the problem, your mixing it up)
The bat was never defined in the original statement, so defining the bat is a byproduct of finding out X (the way it went through my mind anyways, how i shouted 5 cents)
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Fkyx
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
United States109 Posts
June 13 2012 06:51 GMT
#98
Doing it in my head, I got $0.10.

After doing it on paper, I got $0.05.

The results of this study are 100% correct.
Sup son? ¯\__(ツ)__/¯
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
June 13 2012 06:52 GMT
#99
On June 13 2012 15:44 Snackysnacks wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 13 2012 15:19 SipNanana wrote:
On June 13 2012 15:11 Punscho wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:41 SipNanana wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:09 Artemis_ wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:06 SipNanana wrote:
can someone please explain these?

Bat + Ball = $1.10 (ok)
Bat = Ball + $1 (ok)
=> (Ball +1) + Ball = 1.10 (no..... ball + $1 = bat + ball) no where did it say if you buy 2 balls and add a dollar it equals $1.10
Ball + Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
2Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
Ball = $.05 (now irrelevant)


Ball = X
Bat = X + 1.00
X+ (X + 1.00) = 1.10
2X = .10 (If you do not understand how I got here, then well... idk what to say)
X = .05


my problem with this is;
let's say we know the ball costs 10cents, using your formula to prove it.


If we know the ball costs 10 cents we have no unknown X for his equation. If we would tackle it using logic it would also make either the premise P1: Ball + Bat = 1.10 false or the premise P2: Bat + 1.00 = Ball false.


so you're saying the question is wrong not the price of the ball? Equations should work backwards


Isnt the question define X, with x + x + 1 = 1.1 Being the general statement
Its still really hard to think anyone can be serious with 10 cents being the ball right. even if so that would make the bat 1.10 (being a dollar more) and the total 1.20(not the problem, your mixing it up)
The bat was never defined in the original statement, so defining the bat is a byproduct of finding out X (the way it went through my mind anyways, how i shouted 5 cents)


Yes i guess it's supposed to make people wrongly assume "oh the bat is 1 dollar, ball is 10 cents = 1.1" even though it's really that the bat also must be 1 dollar more than the ball, so that wouldn't work. Super easy math, but i guess the point is to word it such that it isn't as clear if being too hasty
SipNanana
Profile Joined June 2012
Australia8 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-06-13 06:55:02
June 13 2012 06:53 GMT
#100
On June 13 2012 15:44 Snackysnacks wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 13 2012 15:19 SipNanana wrote:
On June 13 2012 15:11 Punscho wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:41 SipNanana wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:09 Artemis_ wrote:
On June 13 2012 14:06 SipNanana wrote:
can someone please explain these?

Bat + Ball = $1.10 (ok)
Bat = Ball + $1 (ok)
=> (Ball +1) + Ball = 1.10 (no..... ball + $1 = bat + ball) no where did it say if you buy 2 balls and add a dollar it equals $1.10
Ball + Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
2Ball = $.10 (now irrelevant)
Ball = $.05 (now irrelevant)


Ball = X
Bat = X + 1.00
X+ (X + 1.00) = 1.10
2X = .10 (If you do not understand how I got here, then well... idk what to say)
X = .05


my problem with this is;
let's say we know the ball costs 10cents, using your formula to prove it.


If we know the ball costs 10 cents we have no unknown X for his equation. If we would tackle it using logic it would also make either the premise P1: Ball + Bat = 1.10 false or the premise P2: Bat + 1.00 = Ball false.


so you're saying the question is wrong not the price of the ball? Equations should work backwards


Isnt the question define X, with x + x + 1 = 1.1 Being the general statement
Its still really hard to think anyone can be serious with 10 cents being the ball right. even if so that would make the bat 1.10 (being a dollar more) and the total 1.20(not the problem, your mixing it up)
The bat was never defined in the original statement, so defining the bat is a byproduct of finding out X (the way it went through my mind anyways, how i shouted 5 cents)


I just think the answer can be either 5 or 10 cents. Using a mathematical equation doesn't prove every situation.
The question is; What is the price if there is 1 dollar difference? (White still costing $1.10)
If you can't use your equation to resolve if you know the answer, doesn't it make your formula incorrect?
If you're not first, you're last..
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16 17 18 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 3h 24m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ProTech172
JuggernautJason94
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 17565
Shuttle 629
Hyuk 97
firebathero 86
HiyA 62
Pusan 26
ajuk12(nOOB) 11
White-Ra 10
Dota 2
capcasts83
League of Legends
Doublelift1923
Other Games
gofns24771
Grubby2611
fl0m1889
summit1g1600
Beastyqt519
shahzam406
mouzStarbuck255
XaKoH 221
KnowMe201
dupreeh129
C9.Mang0128
ArmadaUGS114
IndyStarCraft 84
Trikslyr52
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1134
StarCraft 2
angryscii 21
[ Show 13 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• blackmanpl 53
• Azhi_Dahaki37
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• WagamamaTV646
Other Games
• imaqtpie1298
• Shiphtur239
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
3h 24m
Rogue vs Cure
Replay Cast
4h 24m
Big Brain Bouts
13h 24m
Garitos vs ArT
Lambo vs Percival
TriGGeR vs ByuN
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 13h
OSC
1d 15h
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
1d 18h
Mixu vs TBD
Spirit vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
Patches Events
1d 19h
OSC
2 days
Afreeca Starleague
2 days
Soma vs Shuttle
BeSt vs Rush
WardiTV Weekly
2 days
[ Show More ]
Afreeca Starleague
3 days
Leta vs ggaemo
Jaedong vs Queen
GSL
3 days
PiGosaur Cup
4 days
Kung Fu Cup
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
The PondCast
5 days
KCM Race Survival
5 days
Escore
6 days
IntoTheTV X SOOP
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-09-02
PiG Sty Festival 8.0
Light Tournament 2026

Ongoing

KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 3
K-JUNGMAN
ASL Season 22
Super Anchor Qualifying S3
CSL 2026 AUTUMN (S22)
RSL Revival: Season 6
Calamity Invitational
Big Dog Cup 2026 Div 1
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
Esports World Cup 2026: LCQ
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual
Stake Ranked Episode 3
XSE Pro League 2026

Upcoming

Acropolis #5
Acropolis #5 - TRS
Escore Tournament S3: King of Kings
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Acropolis #5 - GSA
Acropolis #5 - GSB
Acropolis #5 - GSC
HSC XXX
Stellar Fest 2: Lunar Cup
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Offline Finals
BLAST Rivals Fall 2026
IEM Beijing 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 5
PGL Masters Bucharest 2026
1win Private Club #2
Thunderpick World Champ. '26
ESL Pro League Season 24
Stake Ranked Episode 4
1win Private Club #1
Logitech G Play Connect 2026
SL StarSeries Fall 2026
FISSURE Playground #3
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.