Originally Posted by airote
Yeah, the questions were definently not really good, and pretty stupid. Eg; "Is homo-sexuality natural?" Yes it is. It's been proven for at least 50 years now.
Well even that question is questionable, are they talking about homosexual behaviour (which is obviously natural to an extent), or homosexual lifestyle (which is obviously not natural to an extent).
I wonder if they do take things like that in to account.
I always think "well I agree/disagree, but do I agree/disagree for the reason that you think I'm agreeing/disagreeing for?".
<Faint> the rules have been stated quite clearly 3 times now from high staff
The way tests like these work are by giving the tests to people who they already know the political affiliation of, and they doing statistical analysis on the questions and answers to see which answers are more prevalent in which camp of thought, and then using that data to make an assumption of another person who takes the test that somebody who answers a question in a certain way is likely leaning in a certain direction because people who lean in that direction tend to answer the question that way. Why is irrelevant in the analysis, it's merely measuring statistical averages.
Heck, if authoritarians would routinely agree with "Chocolate is the superior flavor to all flavors of ice cream", and libertarians would routinely disagree, then it could function as a question for this sort of test.
Heck, if authoritarians would routinely agree with "Chocolate is the superior flavor to all flavors of ice cream", and libertarians would routinely disagree, then it could function as a question for this sort of test.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Forumite
Originally Posted by Oracle
The way tests like these work are by giving the tests to people who they already know the political affiliation of, and they doing statistical analysis on the questions and answers to see which answers are more prevalent in which camp of thought, and then using that data to make an assumption of another person who takes the test that somebody who answers a question in a certain way is likely leaning in a certain direction because people who lean in that direction tend to answer the question that way. Why is irrelevant in the analysis, it's merely measuring statistical averages.
Heck, if authoritarians would routinely agree with "Chocolate is the superior flavor to all flavors of ice cream", and libertarians would routinely disagree, then it could function as a question for this sort of test.
I took this test because of this thread and because I didn't have a solid grip on what my exact stance on every issue was. Needless to say, it helped. A couple of 'joke' tests later, I was able to replicate Stalin's and Hitler's results accurately enough, and the results weren't surprising. If only I had put in 'strongly agree' here and 'disagree' instead of 'agree' there, I wouldn't be too far off from one or the other.
Since I am unable to post pictures at this time, take Numbaonah's dot and move it one square to the right.
All it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy. That’'s how far the world is from where I am. Just one bad day.
