Reply to comment
averages vs. sure bets
May 18, 2008 by Anonymous, 1 year 26 weeks ago
Comment id: 29934
Reply
About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
The trouble with all these "both ways are equal on average" scenarios is that when presented to people they are given (or often assume they are given) ONE chance at a loss or gain.
Yes, if they were deciding for a community (many people playing) or if they knew they had 1000 chances, then they may act "rational".
But most people are assuming one toss, one pick, one iteration. And so they are choosing rationally given that assumption (i.e. take the sure thing).