Suggestion-clairvoyant test for JREF site.

[DuckTapeFileMan]

It would be possible for this site to create somewhere where registered users can try their luck at clairvoyance.

You could have the option of clicking on 1 of 5 cards, the star, moon, wavy line, etc. the card that will be guessed at would be chosen by a random number generato software.

You get one try every 10minutes.

The JREF site could keep a public communal score.


It would be a good experiment.

Any comments?

[tkingdoll]

Originally posted by DuckTapeFileMan
It would be possible for this site to create somewhere where registered users can try their luck at clairvoyance.

You could have the option of clicking on 1 of 5 cards, the star, moon, wavy line, etc. the card that will be guessed at would be chosen by a random number generato software.

You get one try every 10minutes.

The JREF site could keep a public communal score.


It would be a good experiment.

Any comments?

I have a comment. Would you consider changing your avatar? It's making my stomach churn and I can't concentrate on the content of your post enough to make an answer!

[Ducky]

Originally posted by tkingdoll
I have a comment. Would you consider changing your avatar? It's making my stomach churn and I can't concentrate on the content of your post enough to make an answer!



Don't mind TK, she's been spoiled my my gorgeous avatar, and she just likes to drool over skepdudes.




Sounds like a fun idea. DO you know html? If you designed a website that could do it, I would imagine there could be a link put up for us to enjoy the amusings of change guessings.

I wouls also suggest pithy responses when we don't do any better than chance, for added amusement.

[tkingdoll]

Originally posted by fowlsound


Don't mind TK, she's been spoiled my my gorgeous avatar, and she just likes to drool over skepdudes.





It's not my fault! I'm sensitive and icky avatars on a public forum are liable to bias the reader, which would be a shame.

I agree that in principle, the test idea is a fun one, why not email the JREF directly and suggest it? There would have to be clear messages about the odds of guessing by chance, we don't want to encourage any woo woos who accidentally get 4 out of 10.

[Ducky]

Originally posted by tkingdoll
It's not my fault! I'm sensitive and icky avatars on a public forum are liable to bias the reader, which would be a shame.

I agree that in principle, the test idea is a fun one, why not email the JREF directly and suggest it? There would have to be clear messages about the odds of guessing by chance, we don't want to encourage any woo woos who accidentally get 4 out of 10.


I agree it should be very clear in the message.



so you're saying I'm not hot? Who's gonna be on the skepdude calendar, then?

I'd better change my avatar before I ruin any skepchicks through evidence of grossality.

[Ashles]

Originally posted by tkingdoll
It's not my fault! I'm sensitive and icky avatars on a public forum are liable to bias the reader, which would be a shame.

I agree that in principle, the test idea is a fun one, why not email the JREF directly and suggest it? There would have to be clear messages about the odds of guessing by chance, we don't want to encourage any woo woos who accidentally get 4 out of 10.
Isn't that the exact problem? Anyone who gets any result that appears to differ from chance may get the wrong idea and start thinking they are psychic, even though they fall within standard chance parameters.
It might be fun, but I don't think it would have any real use.

Anyway here is a 25 trial Zener test (http://moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk/~paul/cgi-bin/zener.cgi) for fun.

[tkingdoll]

Originally posted by Ashles


Anyway here is a 25 trial Zener test (http://moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk/~paul/cgi-bin/zener.cgi) for fun.

Well, tk, you got 5 / 25 correct (20%)
By chance we would expect 5 / 25 correct guesses (20%)
For 25 trials, a score of 9 or above would be statistically significant

Dammit, I'm so average!

Yes, I agree that it could be a can of worms if someone did do significantly better than average, but if they could do that repeatedly then it should be investigated. The wording would need to include a caveat about repeatability.

ETA I just noticed the original post suggested this for registered users. I think that would be counter-productive as this is a forum for skeptic thinking, not for psychics.

[Azrael 5]

Well I've got buckley's chance of being psychic I got 4 right out of 25,one less than chance.Not that good then.;)

[Ducky]

Well there's always going to be someone that does better than average and there is always the circular logic that they are the one special person with the psi ability. When they repeat the excercise to account for statistical anomolies, they will learn how statistics work.

I don't think it opens a can of worms as long as you easily explain statistics and suggest they repeat the test for demonstratable results.

[tsg]

Originally posted by Azrael 5
Well I've got buckley's chance of being psychic I got 4 right out of 25,one less than chance.Not that good then.;)

I got 3 / 25. I'm not just not psychic, I'm unlucky as well.

But then I got 7 / 25 on my second try. I'm almost significant!

Of course, if you average them, I got 5 / 25....

[Ashles]

Originally posted by fowlsound
I don't think it opens a can of worms as long as you easily explain statistics and suggest they repeat the test for demonstratable results.
That's probably true.

But my only concern is that the people who will want to believe they are psychic will register the higher than chance trials and fnid excuses for the average times.

And the sceptics know the statistics of this already.

Ah maybe I'm just being overly cautious.
What the hell. It'd be interesting to see people's responses to it anyway.

(I got 4/25 BTW)

[Ashles]

2/25 that time. And i really concentrated. :(

[Ducky]

Originally posted by Ashles
That's probably true.

But my only concern is that the people who will want to believe they are psychic will register the higher than chance trials and fnid excuses for the average times.

And the sceptics know the statistics of this already.

Ah maybe I'm just being overly cautious.
What the hell. It'd be interesting to see people's responses to it anyway.

(I got 4/25 BTW)


Perhaps a log in that will enable the page to remember the hits and misses? One that calculates all results without letting the person forget the bad results? Some sort of cookie?

Just a thought. As long as the explination is clear and the results are kept "honest" I think it'd do just fine.

Well except for those claiming Randi is either fixing the results or psychicly blocking the people attempting to use their "powers." Of course there's no arguing with those nutters anyway.

[Blondin]

I just did the test 3 times scoring 4, 7 and 8. Each time I just chose whatever was in the same column. I used the 2nd column for the 1st test, the 1st column for the 2nd test and the 5th column for the 3rd test.

Woo-hoo...

[Dredred]

Originally posted by fowlsound
Perhaps a log in that will enable the page to remember the hits and misses? One that calculates all results without letting the person forget the bad results? Some sort of cookie?

I think it would be best if every trial will be stored in a database, and the number of a user's trials and their average score would be visible to anyone. There could be a 'high score ranking' or whatever you call it, listing the users with the highest average, but you would only qualify for the ranking if you've done more than, say, 25 trials, to prevent people from getting a top ranking based on only one or a few lucky hits.

I love the idea, btw.

[Seismosaurus]

Well, Seismosaurus, you got 8 / 25 correct (32%)
By chance we would expect 5 / 25 correct guesses (20%)
For 25 trials, a score of 9 or above would be statistically significant


Cool, I'm almost psychic!

You'd have to have a lot more explanation. For instance, what does "statistically significant" mean? Because you look at this and say "hey, chance says you should get 20%, I got 32%, why isn't that significant? Why do I have to get 36%?"

And if this is a JREF thing, I can see anybody who happens to get 9 or more right is going to go around claiming they won the JREF prize and Randi won't pay up on some technicality he invented. It would promote more "it's all rigged" nonsense.

[John Jackson]

I'm definitely psychic :cool:

I scored 4/25, 2/25, 1/25, 4/25, and 7/25.

That makes 1 away, 3 away, 4 away, 1 away, and 2 away form average. i.e. 11 away from average: far better than any “9�.

This is proof that I have psychics’ ability to handle statistics. :D

[Ducky]

Originally posted by John Jackson
I'm definitely psychic :cool:

I scored 4/25, 2/25, 1/25, 4/25, and 7/25.

That makes 1 away, 3 away, 4 away, 1 away, and 2 away form average. i.e. 11 away from average: far better than any “9�.

This is proof that I have psychics’ ability to handle statistics. :D


I would be inclined to accept your conclusions if it weren't for your bloody footy team. Newcastle. Bah.


(Just kidding, mate.)

[eri]

6/25 and 5/25. But I just kept hitting the + symbol. I used this test to explain statistics to a high school class once, and then wowed them by getting 25/25 on my first try, right there in front of them. Then explained that I could see the reflection of the card in the glasses of the student I had picked to hold it up. :) I cheat.

[John Jackson]

Originally posted by fowlsound
I would be inclined to accept your conclusions if it weren't for your bloody footy team. Newcastle. I think that everyone should be allowed 1 delusion ;)

Newcastle Utd - premiership champions 2005/6.

That's mine :D

[delphi_ote]

Originally posted by Ashles
2/25 that time. And i really concentrated. :(

Ash, it's obvous you have inverse psychic powers because of your skepticism. You subconsiously choose the wrong card because admitting your powers would shatter your world view. It's clear that you're a very gifted and powerful psychic. For just 25 dollars, I could train you to overcome your subconscious inhibitions and unlock the power of your mind!

[delphi_ote]

I got 7 right by picking the middle card every time!

[c4ts]

I got 6 right by clicking the first card every time. You think the margin for chance is a bit off?

By picking the second card every time, I got 10 right! That's statistically signifigant!

2 out of 10 for the last card every time. I did worse than chance relying on chance.

7 out of 10 for picking the square every time. The square makes you psychic!

[DuckTapeFileMan]

I was thinking of more of a collective score but I suppose individual scores could be kept as well.

[DuckTapeFileMan]

The test could be done with these cards.

http://plaza.harmonix.ne.jp/~k-miwa/magic/best/image/esp2.jpg

[Mojo]

Originally posted by John Jackson
I think that everyone should be allowed 1 delusion ;)

Newcastle Utd - premiership champions 2005/6.

That's mine :D My delusion's bigger than yours! :p

Carlisle United - Premiership Champions 2008/9!

Oh, I scored 7, 5 and 5 on three tries at the test, BTW.

[John Jackson]

Originally posted by Mojo
My delusion's bigger than yours! :p

Carlisle United - Premiership Champions 2008/9!
That one's worthy of the Randi challenge. :D

[Ashles]

Originally posted by DuckTapeFileMan
The test could be done with these cards.

http://plaza.harmonix.ne.jp/~k-miwa/magic/best/image/esp2.jpg
Errm, did you click on my link?

We have all been doing it with those cards.

[Azrael 5]

Originally posted by Ashles
Errm, did you click on my link?

We have all been doing it with those cards.
Did wonder what he was going on about!

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Originally posted by Ashles
Errm, did you click on my link?

We have all been doing it with those cards.

ok, I clicked on your link after I posted.

The star is better on the picture I posted anyway.

[Ashles]

Originally posted by DuckTapeFileMan
The star is better on the picture I posted anyway.
:confused:

It's a photo of five Zener cards so we can't really use them.

What a strange comment.

[Grimes]

I did it three times and got 6/25 each time. I guess that makes me evil. I'd better go hide in some jpeg artifacts.

[ernon]

Originally posted by Ashles
Isn't that the exact problem? Anyone who gets any result that appears to differ from chance may get the wrong idea and start thinking they are psychic, even though they fall within standard chance parameters.
It might be fun, but I don't think it would have any real use.

Anyway here is a 25 trial Zener test (http://moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk/~paul/cgi-bin/zener.cgi) for fun.

I thought it would be fun to really concentrate and see what popped into my mind. I got 9 right on my first try. Obviously I am psychic and should be earning big bucks from my powers. :D

[bruto]

I got 3 of 25, but I predicted it, so I'm obviously psychic anyway. Woo Hoo!

[DuckTapeFileMan]

Originally posted by Ashles
:confused:

It's a photo of five Zener cards so we can't really use them.

What a strange comment.


The star on your link is a wicca star, which I think might change the results-ie some people would avoid it and some people would be attracted to it. I wonder why they chose it.

The other point is, that you don't know what the result is until you have done all 25 sets of cards, this isn't testing clairvoyance this is testing your Jedi powers.


I got 4/25.

[Ashles]

Originally posted by DuckTapeFileMan
The star on your link is a wicca star, which I think might change the results-ie some people would avoid it and some people would be attracted to it. I wonder why they chose it.

The other point is, that you don't know what the result is until you have done all 25 sets of cards, this isn't testing clairvoyance this is testing your Jedi powers.
Please send your answers on a postcard to the usual address, marking the card with the competition title "What is DTFM talking about now?"

Members of the Disney corporation and their families are ineligible. Winners will be notified within 28 days of competition end date. No correspondence will be entered into. Judges decision is final. Drink Diet Coke.

[MoonDragn]

I think he's saying that star looks like a pentacle...


Anyway heres my results on the first try :

Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Well, test, you got 11 / 25 correct (44%)
By chance we would expect 5 / 25 correct guesses (20%)
For 25 trials, a score of 9 or above would be statistically significant

[Tyltyl]

1st try: 5/25
2nd try: 8/25

Both times I just randomly clicked them.