EPT[Psychology] Overconfidence - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
3 Lions
United States3705 Posts
| ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
On July 31 2009 03:05 GG.Win wrote: i really doubt anyone got 10 on that, unless they knew the test questions beforehand. Lies, 10/10 was easy. | ||
|
Johnny B
United States76 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + 90% I am confident in my confidence levels. Of course, you could guess 1-1,000,000 on the first nine and then 0 on the tenth... + Show Spoiler [My Guesses] + 1. MLK age: 30-50 2. Nile miles: 3000-5000 3. OPEC countries: 3-30 4. OT books: 39 5. Moon diameter: 2000-5000 6. Boeing pounds: 20,000-2,000,000 7. Mozart YOB: 1750-1770 8. Elephant gestation: 180-1000 9. London to Tokyo: 6000-11,000 10. Marianas depth: 35,000-70,000 + Show Spoiler [Actual Answers] + 1.) 39 Years 2.) 4,187 Miles 3.) 13 Countries 4.) 39 Books 5.) 2160 Miles 6.) 390,000 Pounds 7.) 1756 8.) 645 Days 9.) 5,959 Miles 10.) 36,198 Feet + Show Spoiler [Metric Answers] + 1.) 39 Years 2.) 6,738 km 3.) 13 Countries 4.) 39 Books 5.) 3,476 km 6.) 180,000 kg 7.) 1756 8.) 645 Days 9.) 9,590 km 10.) 11,033 m + Show Spoiler [Conversions] + 1 mile = 1.609344 km (exact) 1 foot = 0.3048 m (exact) 1 pound = 0.453592368444 kg (approximate, I think) | ||
|
Eniram
Sudan3166 Posts
On July 31 2009 00:42 Bosu wrote: I don't think you get the point of the experiment. But ya that would work if you seriously thought there were between 1 to 1 million contries in opec. Oh no, I understand it entirely. I just don't think its setup very well. The questions should be something people might actually know. | ||
|
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
edit: 10/10 means you might have made intervals too wide If you did manage to actually make 90% intervals, your most probable result would be 9/10 | ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
And i had problems with counting in pounds, feets and miles, cuz around here everybody always uses kg, m, km and so on | ||
|
ShadowDrgn
United States2497 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + I underestimated 3 of them: Length of Nile: 4000 miles tops Weight of 747: 200k pounds tops Elephant: 500 days tops | ||
Heyoka
Katowice25012 Posts
It is quite an interesting field, and there's a fair amount of research on it already. My problem with most of the research though, is that it's done by economists with a basic understanding of psychology, rather than by psychologists with a basic understanding of economy. There's a place for both these groups, but it shouldn't be completely dominated by one group. For example, measuring how people react and interpret specific market situations might be best studied by a mostly-economist, as it would require an in-depth economic understanding of what those specific market situations are, and how they should be reacted to etc. However, studying confidence levels in traders should be studied by a mostly-psychologist, as the confidence test for traders and school-teachers and teenagers are basically the same. So you don't need detailed a detailed economic understanding to do the study, but you might need a detailed psychological understading to interpret the results. Which is why I think there's a gap for psychologists in the field still, and why I'm focusing on it  Wooooooooooooow. I'm looking to do behavioral economic stuff after my undergrad, for that exact same reason. Where are you doing your grad work? Lets collaborate. Think of the possibilities....a team liquid published paper. What books would you recommend for the trader stuff you mentioned earlier? | ||
|
Johnny B
United States76 Posts
On July 31 2009 03:20 Geo.Rion wrote: And i had problems with counting in pounds, feets and miles, cuz around here everybody always uses kg, m, km and so on Hey metric lovers, you don't need to convert your answers into English anymore! + Show Spoiler [Metric Answers] + 1.) 39 Years 2.) 6,738 km 3.) 13 Countries 4.) 39 Books 5.) 3,476 km 6.) 180,000 kg 7.) 1756 8.) 645 Days 9.) 9,590 km 10.) 11,033 m | ||
Daigomi
South Africa4316 Posts
On July 31 2009 03:25 heyoka wrote: Wooooooooooooow. I'm looking to do behavioral economic stuff after my undergrad, for that exact same reason. Where are you doing your grad work? Lets collaborate. Think of the possibilities....a team liquid published paper. What books would you recommend for the trader stuff you mentioned earlier? Haha, I sent a PM | ||
|
azndsh
United States4447 Posts
| ||
|
bN`
Slovenia504 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
I don't completely understand what this was about, other than if people are naive or not. Doesn't seem like overconfidence has anything to do with it. I can still be overconfident yet take full advantage of the game. Well... I guess that kind of is what overconfidence is...but I would never define it in this sort of arena, myself. | ||
|
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
On July 31 2009 04:44 travis wrote: This was easy because I am fixed. Read the op again. | ||
|
StorrZerg
United States13921 Posts
On July 31 2009 00:39 dcberkeley wrote: + Show Spoiler + On July 31 2009 00:13 azndsh wrote: 8.) Gestation period of an Asian elephant (in days) + Show Spoiler + Answers: 8.) 645 Days + Show Spoiler + Jesus Christ, give a medal to all of their mothers + Show Spoiler + lol! what about the man that has to put up with several of them? | ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
and im a narcissist in real life, so "nice" thread. Proves lots. | ||
|
Djabanete
United States2786 Posts
On July 31 2009 04:44 travis wrote: This was easy because I am not stupid and put gigantic ranges for everything that I didn't know. That means you are hugely underconfident. You might want to consider some self-help books, this can be a real impediment to leading a normal life. Best of luck. Also, read the first page? | ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
On July 31 2009 05:15 Djabanete wrote: lol how is this even an issue of confidence? Its an issue of being a blind little twat or seeing reality for what it is. These questions arent taught anywhere. They arent going to be found anywhere in daily life. Almost every single person here should be able to immediately go "hm never bothered to read into this EVER, therefore my chance of answering it correctly is statistically non existent". If you think you can get the answer right despite knowing nothing on the subject, thats not being overly confident, its called a self induced delusion. I'm confident in my ability to reason, thus I answered as Travis did, in a logical rational manner. That means you are hugely underconfident. You might want to consider some self-help books, this can be a real impediment to leading a normal life. Best of luck. Also, read the first page? | ||
|
Zozma
United States1626 Posts
On July 31 2009 05:23 Dazed_Spy wrote: lol how is this even an issue of confidence? Its an issue of being a blind little twat or seeing reality for what it is. These questions arent taught anywhere. They arent going to be found anywhere in daily life. Almost every single person here should be able to immediately go "hm never bothered to read into this EVER, therefore my chance of answering it correctly is statistically non existent". If you think you can get the answer right despite knowing nothing on the subject, thats not being overly confident, its called a self induced delusion. I'm confident in my ability to reason, thus I answered as Travis did, in a logical rational manner. It's obvious to everybody that you can get a perfect 10/10 if you just pick "negative infinity-infinity" for everything, but that's not exactly the point of the test. | ||
|
Djabanete
United States2786 Posts
On July 31 2009 05:23 Dazed_Spy wrote: lol how is this even an issue of confidence? Its an issue of being a blind little twat or seeing reality for what it is. These questions arent taught anywhere. They arent going to be found anywhere in daily life. Almost every single person here should be able to immediately go "hm never bothered to read into this EVER, therefore my chance of answering it correctly is statistically non existent". If you think you can get the answer right despite knowing nothing on the subject, thats not being overly confident, its called a self induced delusion. I'm confident in my ability to reason, thus I answered as Travis did, in a logical rational manner. On July 31 2009 00:37 Strayline wrote: You need to think about if you would take the bet both ways, if you put 0 - a google plex you wouldn't actually take the bet against your range even if you got 9 dollars back if you put in one. Like I said, read the first page. The test isn't about setting bounds that you know include the correct answer, it's about setting bounds that you're 90% sure include the correct answer. In other words, you should be willing to take a bet either that you're right or that you're wrong (with the odds adjusted appropriately). It's harder than one might think. | ||
| ||
