Key actor in this saga: People saw 70-90% Clinton win probability; didn't understand that 1-2% polling error would move that by 30-40%.
-
-
If only the people who think understanding statistics solves biases of perceived risk understood the statistics on risk perception.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, 538 was the best, and tried to explain & was resisted. Many worse ones. Even 538 needed to communicate better. https://twitter.com/Mike_Knew/status/807454359961227268 …
This Tweet is unavailable. -
I think NYT's way of explaining it in terms of professional NFL kicker's chance of missing an x yard field goal was reasonable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
even very simple, low dimensional dynamical systems can be unbelievably chaotic with feedback. people don't realize this.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Especially as democracy primes people to think > 50% means a win. Pollsters need better design/messaging to represent uncertainty.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.