Define Average

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harrisonized

That's precisely the point.

Just testing if it's true.

---

I'm on to you! =P I never voted either.

Anyways, I saw something similar to this in a psychology class where the professor asked the class of 500 students to predict how well they would do, from a 0.00 to 4.00 GPA scale. Almost everyone voted above 3.00, peaking at 3.90, while there were 1 or 2 0.00.

Then the professor showed the actual results from previous classes, where the peak was more at 2.40 GPA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ablu2

I voted above average because my grade is 90-100% :P

---

What if the actual average is 98%? o.O This really happened in a middle school class, where the teacher literally made it impossible to fail, aside from not showing up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KajitiSouls

What if the actual average is 98%? o.O This really happened in a middle school class, where the teacher literally made it impossible to fail, aside from not showing up.

---

When one considers the average, one must also consider the sample set. The sample set he's using is of all students, in which the average is truly about 70-75%. Your sample set, being different, also has a different average.

Average Mesos = 10m
Average Grade = C.

mmmm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimism_bias

until people know about optimism bias and its various forms, we often assume that the results of opinion statistics are accurate reflections of reality. and because there are too many meanings of the word "average" i think we have to "define average" ourselves first, in order to ask a meaningful question such as a poll.

do we mean
- average, or norm? what are we asking here?
- measures of central tendency? statistical measures? mode is very different from median, and both are different from mean. and how will you do that with non-numerical variables?

with opinions there are a host of psychological factors to take into account too (look up chapters on attitudes and beliefs)

apparently depressed people, as well as having a lower self-concept, have somewhat more accurate views of the world. what does this say about how non-depressed people's self-concepts?

i am awesomeness covered in cheese so obv i am above average

Average=a
Sum of all values=s
No. of tudents=n

s/n=a

for all we know Average can be anything

For me, average is based on whether you care or not. Looking at these poll results, I will elaborate what Im saying: The people who dont care are usually the ones who are "under average". As they dont care, they'll naturally not vote.

Yeah there are people below average in the class but most of those people couldnt give a crap (I know there are exceptions but those people usually cant help it). IF they were to try as hard as those getting "above average" grades, they'd probably be up there in the above average category too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥Ji

do we mean
- average, or norm? what are we asking here?
- measures of central tendency? statistical measures? mode is very different from median, and both are different from mean. and how will you do that with non-numerical variables?

---

I leave this open ended so that the participants can choose which scale works better for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥Ji

apparently depressed people, as well as having a lower self-concept, have somewhat more accurate views of the world. what does this say about how non-depressed people's self-concepts?

---

I wanted to test this mechanism out to see how it worked, and what I find is that it's not optimism bias. Optimism bias is the bias in which favorable outcomes are perceived. The effect in this poll is the rejection of being below the average, which isn't true optimism bias.

Depressed people don't have more "accurate" views of the world, (as noted in one of the participants who believes that he is much BELOW the average). He STILL voted average when he didn't truly believe that. What I find is that those who would vote "below average" are unwilling to admit that they're below average (fear of rejection from society or perceived depression perhaps?), thus they vote average or above average, even when nobody can see their votes (which is what I find the most interesting, why even in pure privacy people aren't honest with themselves).

I see that one brave soul voted average, but the vast majority of the voters have still voted average or above average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Retalion

Yeah there are people below average in the class but most of those people couldnt give a crap (I know there are exceptions but those people usually cant help it). IF they were to try as hard as those getting "above average" grades, they'd probably be up there in the above average category too.

---

This isn't about actuality. It's about perception. Even if forced to vote, I'm pretty sure we'd see the same effects on this poll.

I don't understand the point of this poll/thread. Surely you're not just now realizing that people will always think of themselves better than most.

For the record, I'm better than all of you, and voted accordingly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg

Surely you're not just now realizing that people will always think of themselves better than most.

---

Of course not. Being the curious person that I am, I'm only testing it out.

I'll think of something new one of these days and test that instead cuz yea, this idea is kinda old. I can't think of anything better than my A, B, C, D, choose one based on free association thread though and I already did that a long time ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harrisonized

I leave this open ended so that the participants can choose which scale works better for them.

---

but now we don't know what the results mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harrisonized

Optimism bias is the bias in which favorable outcomes are perceived. The effect in this poll is the rejection of being below the average, which isn't true optimism bias.

---

can you explain your reasoning for this "rejection of bad outcomes" rather than "preference for good outcomes"? finding it hard to grasp sorry!

forgot it is possible it is also self-selection bias, as pointed out above, ie "only the people who care will vote" - there is no reason why we can attribute it to either optimism bias or self-selection bias, or both, or neither. yay research



just a note in response to

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harrisonized

Depressed people don't have more "accurate" views of the world, (as noted in one of the participants who believes that he is much BELOW the average).

---

i quote wikipedia, but was also taught this during my psychology degree:

"Depressives tend to be more accurate, and less overconfident in their assessments of the probabilities of good and bad events occurring to others but they tend to overestimate the probability of bad events happening to them."

this has been taught in my psychology course for at least 5 years, but not sure where to find a reference, maybe a textbook rather than an article by now

Above average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥Ji

but now we don't know what the results mean?

---

It means they rate themselves according to whatever works for them. (Optimism bias for the scale that they used.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥Ji

can you explain your reasoning for this "rejection of bad outcomes" rather than "preference for good outcomes"? finding it hard to grasp sorry!

---

Preference for good outcomes means leaning towards the good outcome.
Rejection of bad outcomes means leaning away from the bad outcome.

There's actually a difference in the two even if they lead to the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥Ji

forgot it is possible it is also self-selection bias, as pointed out above, ie "only the people who care will vote" - there is no reason why we can attribute it to either optimism bias or self-selection bias, or both, or neither. yay research

---

Yes, there's also that. Unfortunately, I can't control that variable. However, I do think people won't see this thread and just say they "don't care". Rather, people will see this thread, rate themselves, then decide whether or not they will vote according to their perception of themselves.

Thus, there are two possible explanations presented by this poll:
1) People who perceive themselves as average or above average would choose to vote more often than those who perceive themselves negatively.
2) People just think highly of themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥Ji

just a note in response to
i quote wikipedia, but was also taught this during my psychology degree:

"Depressives tend to be more accurate, and less overconfident in their assessments of the probabilities of good and bad events occurring to others but they tend to overestimate the probability of bad events happening to them."

this has been taught in my psychology course for at least 5 years, but not sure where to find a reference, maybe a textbook rather than an article by now

---

I know of this, and I'll say now that I think this is questionable. Not all things written in textbooks should be taken for absolute truth. If depressives tend to be more accurate, then how do you explain the fact that people who live happier lives tend to live fuller lives compared to depressives? (in other words, how can people who aren't accurate live very "happy" lives?)

If depressives were more accurate, then genetically speaking, the depressives would have more survival value and therefore would be more likely to pass their genes to the next generation. Then we'd ALL be more depressed than we should be. (emotional state "can" be passed on, as evidenced from the fact that animals can be "domesticated" and be more passive rather than aggressive)

In addition, the "definition" of a depressive is someone who has lower self esteem and loss of interest in normally pleasurable activities. The key words here are "lower" and "normally". Who's to say that depressives aren't supposed to have such a state and that we're all just high (which would be an explanation of why we are more optimistic)?

If I'm being myself , I see myself as ~average at best, though I have a horrible lack of self confidence, a lot of people I know suggest to me that because of what I study I could be considered above average (Maths, Further maths, Physics and ICT (United kingdom) A levels [sitting on A grades, or 1-2 marks short so far on all of them], according to wiki which are roughly equal to first year bach degrees in america) but I don't know, I hear it and it goes in one ear and out the other.

Perhaps I am above average, I don't know, that isn't for me to decide, I do what I can and thats good enough for me

1.7 Billion.
80%.

I'd say I'm about...below above average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harrisonized

If depressives were more accurate, then genetically speaking, the depressives would have more survival value and therefore would be more likely to pass their genes to the next generation. Then we'd ALL be more depressed than we should be. (emotional state "can" be passed on, as evidenced from the fact that animals can be "domesticated" and be more passive rather than aggressive)

In addition, the "definition" of a depressive is someone who has lower self esteem and loss of interest in normally pleasurable activities. The key words here are "lower" and "normally". Who's to say that depressives aren't supposed to have such a state and that we're all just high (which would be an explanation of why we are more optimistic)?

---

depression does not improve your quality of life or survival value, but both quality of life and survival value have multiple factors and "accuracy of perception" is only one of them. as a person with diagnosed depression among other things (not liking this "depressive" term, harrisonized..am not "defined" by my depression) i experience reduced energy, lowered self-concept, etc that definitely far outweighs any benefit of "accuracy of perception."

but still think my basic initial perceptions are more accurate, even if just because i am more disconnected to other things. but due to other factors associated with depression, this does not mean i have better survival value, actually i probably don't.

on depression research, the body of literature is VAST. maybe reading some of it first would shed some light on what exactly you disagree with?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥Ji

on depression research, the body of literature is VAST. maybe reading some of it first would shed some light on what exactly you disagree with?

---

I just disagree with the label. It makes it seem as if the "depressive" is like that his entire life or was born that way. Actually, I don't like labels in general. A more accurate term to describe a "depressive" is someone who is "suffering from depression".

However, I still don't think people who are suffering from depression have more accurate views of life. Rather, something other mechanism must be at work for them to hit the target more often. I need to read up on how this part actually works though before I draw any assumptions.

Anyways, I see another person voted for "below average", but now the amount of "above average" people surpass the "average". :f6:

The scenarios are completely bogus. Every person is average in their own way because we're all different and unique. Each average person could have any range between x amount of money and 2.1bil. This is also true of grades. It's impossible to truely calculate the average because, as I said before, and this ties in even better, our brains function a different capacities from each other. For example an average person who's really smart might end up getting a job that gets them x-thousand amount of money a year and might have gotten all A's in school, while a not so smart person who can't keep a job for longer than 1 week ends up making x-hundred amount of money and all F's in school. See what I mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harrisonized

However, I still don't think people who are suffering from depression have more accurate views of life. Rather, something other mechanism must be at work for them to hit the target more often. I need to read up on how this part actually works though before I draw any assumptions.

---

Being accurate is not the same as being successful. If you're reviewing job applicants, do you want the one who "performed spectacularly, solving a myriad of issues, and improving efficiency by 30%" vs. the one who "did the jobs they were assigned without complaint, found the workplace stressful, and struggled to keep up with corporate trends in progress"

Would you pick a sexual partner who assures you they won't get you pregnant, or the one who mentions there's about a 30% chance of pregnancy and that they're not going to be the best father they could be.

reply to OP:

The maximum of something is not really diagnostic as a statistic. Based on the maximum alone, it is impossible to accurately predict where you fall in a given population. It would be more useful if you gave the average score, weight, etc...