Alternative:
Three boxers. Two are equally matched; the other will beat either them, always
You blindly guess that Boxer 1 is the best; the other two fight
Boxer 2 beats Boxer 3. Do you want to stick with Boxer 1 in a Boxer 1 vs. Boxer 2 match-up, or do you want to switch? t.co/s9kYG18qSo
Conversation
Replying to
If find this intuitive, and use stackexchange, you can weigh in here, I just posted this response: math.stackexchange.com/a/3360686
I think the current #2 is fine, but #1 has got to go.
2
14
*UPDATE*
Quote Tweet
UPDATE: A little googling and I see I wasn't the first to suggest this.
It appears Bruce D. Burns and Marieke Wieth appear to be #1 to suggest competition with a 2004 Journal of Experimental Psychology: General psych.usyd.edu.au/staff/bburns/B
Not sure competition is strictly necessary
Show this thread
1
Thanks! It's been on my list of things that maybe have research potential for awhile, but I never did anything with it.
Hopefully twitter gives me, or someone else, some inspiration.
1
3
Show replies
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Thanks, I still plan on doing that thread on how Twitter created a paper, gunning for tomorrow...
Replying to
This is very neat, but if 1 is best and 2-3 equally matched can 2 and 3 tie/draw? Or is there noisy wins? These isomorphs are so interesting
1
8
A tie would instantly tell you that 1 is the strongest.
1
5
Show replies
Replying to
I always found the version with 100 doors extremely intuitive. You choose one, Monty opens 98 empty doors.
My intuition is dynamic. Ask the question: was your first blind guess right or were you wrong? With 100 doors it is obvious you were likely wrong and have to switch.
2
4
37
I like that one too, we discuss it on p. 151 here: pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10
The advantage of this one is that it is intuitive with 3 doors.
The disadvantage of both is that they are not general.
3