Evergreen
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
I was thinking about this yesterday. Looking at the entire sample of healthy volunteers and patients, people with success rates on hard tasks of above 90% chose hard tasks 44% of the time. People with success rates on hard tasks below 90% chose hard tasks 33% of the time. There is no difference when you go lower, ie there is no clear dose-response relationship where people getting dismal completion rates choose hard tasks even less, though this might emerge in a larger sample. And it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that just failing a bit is enough to affect your choices. Could those with more stats skills than I have see whether this alone could account for the group differences in hard vs easy task choice?The problem with this argument of ours, and something that Walitt et al can argue, is that comparing the second half of the game data to the first half of the game data shows that striking out more often doesn’t lead to choosing hard less often. I haven’t seen a convincing counterargument of our own against such a counterargument. @Murph @bobbler @andrewkq
6/15 pts have success rates on hard tasks above 90%.
9/15 pts have success rates on hard tasks below 90%.
14/16 HVs have success rates on hard tasks above 90%.
2/16 HVs have success rates on hard tasks below 90%.