wow this made me remember something I hadn't thought about in years. My dad used to give me Gallup surveys when they came in the mail when I was like eight (sorry in retrospect I realize this is bad). Anyway one time he looked over my responses and his face kinda softened and he was like "awww Annie I didn't know you were so terrified of terrorism all the time" and then we went to ToysRUs and I got a Barbie. Such a mid-2000s thing to happen lol. also, great newsletter as always!
I don't think 2% of people not having heard of either of these sounds particularly unlikely. I can well believe 2% of people (elderly, isolated, mild dementia) have never heard of Amazon. And I don't think I could confidently say I'd heard of the Department of Justice. Granted, I'm not from the US, but plenty of people have virtually no understanding of the government even of their own countries.
While I agree virtually no-one would win a fistfight with a kangaroo, those honestly look like pathologically biased examples to demonstrate their muscles. Like a DALL-E picture of a kangaroo juicing. To your point, “in the wild” (Melbourne zoo) kangaroos just look cute, and you would definitely think you could beat one up.
So, in short, the "Lizardman constant" isn't a constant?
Part of me is really curious if surveys of autistic people avoid the "vibes" technically-false answers, at the expense of needing to word your questions with a lot more care than usual because a lot of the "expected" answers on surveys are technically false to a sufficiently autistic reading
Yes, I think it's better conceptualized as a 'phenomenon' than a 'constant' per se.
In some ways I bet autistic people are as or *more* likely to answer vibes-based. Likert scales seem tricky for a lot of autistic people, especially when they're applied to things that in the real world really do not lend themselves to Likert scales (e.g. the "Most Liberal-Most Conservative" political spectrum). In other ways, you get the exactingly overliteral interpretations that make a different error to most vibes-based answering.
wow this made me remember something I hadn't thought about in years. My dad used to give me Gallup surveys when they came in the mail when I was like eight (sorry in retrospect I realize this is bad). Anyway one time he looked over my responses and his face kinda softened and he was like "awww Annie I didn't know you were so terrified of terrorism all the time" and then we went to ToysRUs and I got a Barbie. Such a mid-2000s thing to happen lol. also, great newsletter as always!
> Amazon, the Department of Justice
I don't think 2% of people not having heard of either of these sounds particularly unlikely. I can well believe 2% of people (elderly, isolated, mild dementia) have never heard of Amazon. And I don't think I could confidently say I'd heard of the Department of Justice. Granted, I'm not from the US, but plenty of people have virtually no understanding of the government even of their own countries.
Police is a stretch, though, I admit.
While I agree virtually no-one would win a fistfight with a kangaroo, those honestly look like pathologically biased examples to demonstrate their muscles. Like a DALL-E picture of a kangaroo juicing. To your point, “in the wild” (Melbourne zoo) kangaroos just look cute, and you would definitely think you could beat one up.
So, in short, the "Lizardman constant" isn't a constant?
Part of me is really curious if surveys of autistic people avoid the "vibes" technically-false answers, at the expense of needing to word your questions with a lot more care than usual because a lot of the "expected" answers on surveys are technically false to a sufficiently autistic reading
Yes, I think it's better conceptualized as a 'phenomenon' than a 'constant' per se.
In some ways I bet autistic people are as or *more* likely to answer vibes-based. Likert scales seem tricky for a lot of autistic people, especially when they're applied to things that in the real world really do not lend themselves to Likert scales (e.g. the "Most Liberal-Most Conservative" political spectrum). In other ways, you get the exactingly overliteral interpretations that make a different error to most vibes-based answering.