This is so cool. Since I figure that nobody actually builds and uses a spinner when answering the question (I certainly didn't), does it show that we are tremendously accurate at randomizing?pic.twitter.com/vSMil3FJc3
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
neat -- it would be very interesting to really quantify what works and what doesn't. (Congrats on such a clever series of studies!)
this can’t work in an study comprised of fewer people fanatically interested in probability.
Could you do us the favor of dumping some here?
Reviewing your other experiments it seems like the percentage in the visualization doesn't matter to the binary choice. It goes about 75/25 regardless which is still interesting. Maybe mix up the order, put the 80 option on the bottom or diminish the skew.
do the answers to other values (say 70/30) typically converge to 80/20 as well?
Imagine repeating an experiment over and over again until you get a result that is improbably good. Then people only retweet the one unusually good random outcome.
I read a study once about how a very large container was filled with marbles and 1000 people were asked to guess how many were in it. The mean of the 1000 guesses was closer to the actual number than any single guess.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.