smarter people are probably more likeley to say "average" as they are more likely to know their limits, while clueless people don't know their limit, hence they think they are better than everybody else.
Kinda odd, like that experiment where good students rated themselves as average, while crappy students rated themselves as better.
Right, and then you could argue that people who actually think of themselves as "smart" will know of such experiments, and will thus rate themselves as "average," knowing that such a label actually indicates that they really are smart.
So basically this kind of survey says very little at all.
The parent link is actually referring to an established study in behavioral economics. It is extremely interesting to learn how the human mind is sometimes way off in relation to reality.
Just a thought. Couldn't a user that is below average who thinks he is above average take this fact as a cue to vote as average to show that he is above average? Wouldn't it then skew the above-average-average-voters downwards?
I think you missed the irony. The fact that he voted himself in the top 5% almost ensures that he is in fact not (according to the original study... assuming I remember correctly)... so he would make a great Editor!
If only you were in the top 5% you would have noticed I was joking ;p
Edit: Oh come on. He's saying an editor would have blocked this poll. I posted the poll so I should be disqualified, but suggested that I be an editor. And based that on my own arrogant self-evaluation from within the poll that a good editor would (apparently) have blocked. And I didn't even say I am in the top 5%, only that I voted that way, which is a ridiculous way to assert intelligence.
Pointing out a single aspect of this poll that "could produce misleading results" is a form of humor so subtle that only the smartest 5% of news.yc readers will get it.
Actually, I laughed at your (less subtle) comment.
I did not laugh at the one to which you replied, which is allegedly more subtle, though I could only know that if I was in the top 5%. I didn't find it funny, ergo I am not in the top 5%. I guess I'll vote "average".
This poll is uniquely distorted by the multitude of different reasons people might have for not voting, or for voting a certain way.
Ideally, "I'm going with my gut" as curi asked.
Sometimes "I'm a confident winner, so I'm voting top 5%"
Sometimes "It would be arrogant to vote above average; I'll vote average."
Sometimes "This poll is dumb. I usually vote but I'll lurk."
Sometimes "This poll is hilarious. I usually lurk but I'll vote."
Sometimes "This poll is so dumb I'm voting bottom 5% just because I considered voting in it."
Sometimes "I'll vote for all options; everybody has good/bad days."
Sometimes "Can you really vote more than one? Let me try..."
For pg to casually mention a source of error that applies to all news.yc polls is like walking up to someone who's been splattered head to toe by a passing truck and saying, "You've got something next to your mouth, right there."
I really don’t know how to compare myself to YC readers. I imagine the population is quite intelligent, and I am quite intelligent as well. I guess that I would be within a standard deviation of the mean.
Dang, this is no fun. It mostly fits a bell curve. Normally if you ask this, you'll get like 75-90% of people saying they're above average ("How good of a driver are you?" is a classic).
I think the problem is that the voters are smart enough to know the statistical classification for this kind of poll and vote accordingly to plug the holes.
Maybe news.yc readers are above average, compared to those other people :)
Or maybe they have heard about those other results and are intentionally voting for underrepresented options to make the poll come out less ridiculous.
