aaaand, I'm back.
1. I will send the answers to anyone who has answered here and anyone who wants them (the latter group needs to ask me for them). The housemate would like to continue getting responses, if they come. Please don't discuss the answers on the thread.
2. The tests are not to study the effect of more knowledge on decision making.
OK I understand as I did not submit my answers.
edgar - you can still post your answers on the thread....
Thanks for the list, but I was really more interested in the scoring and how the material would be used. I'm sure that few would have gotten over 95%, but what was the mean, mode and median? How many scores made up the full set? I think it would be difficult (impossible really) to do any correlates without more data on the test subjects, so what is it that the test reveals about ...... ?
I hope that your friend will share the results of her research with us. I'm very curious about the hypothesis, methodology, analysis, and conclusions.
I'll see what she wants to share.... after the fact, I imagine I can tell you more. But if I told you now, you'd have to die. heehee.
Well, using the key you sent I didn't do very well at all.
Only14 of 61 (23%) were right on the money.
23 more were within the time frames I supplied, and that's 38% of 61.
Combined I had a score of 61% (37 of 61).
I noted a couple of typos in my answers, and gave myself credit for the intened date because the typo was so obvious, ie 1961/1850/1865. The first date is the obvious typo. There were also a couple of answers on the key that were either wrong, or I've misunderstood what was being referred to. On these, I've run a quick check and confirmed that the answer I gave was correct, though perhaps I'm looking at a different reference than the one refered to in the question. That's all carping, to make myself feel better about being such a dummy.
For someone who's supposed to know their history, I stank big time. I look forward to reading the information I mentioned above. I'll be patient. A PM would do, but probably others are also interested.
I'm interested, have comments, will be patient.
Asher, can you send me a PM with the Qs you think aren't right and why you think they aren't right?
I got 34% at the right date (some of them by mere luck), and 38% within the time frame I set.
I think the test has also to do about how high are the standards you set upon yourself (how wide is the time frame for those questions on which you have a vague idea).
My results are complicated -
I got 28 correct - 46%
11 within the range I gave, and this is where it gets tricky, sometimes my range was only one or two years, sometimes, ten years, and a few times it was as high as 20 - 100 years. So, on a couple of those I was both within range and way off - 18%
9 out of range, but a few of those nine were only three years off, since I gave a really tight range, and another few were waaaaaaaaaaaaay off, since I was utterly incorrect. - 15%
I didn't even try 13 - 21%
edit. I had said 12 within range and 8 out at first and then reviewed and saw that I mistated and edited earlier today to 11 and 9. Now I look at it and see I didn't match up 9 and nine... so I fixed it. (honest...)
I got 16 right (26%)
27 were in range (44%)
18 were wrong, some by centuries! (30%)
If we get credit for being in range, I get a barely passing score...
Well, here's my score:
31 answers right on the mark
15 answers within the range of dates
15 answers totally wrong
Hey, I'm pretty pleased with myself!
Okay, my range is between 1400 and 2004; do I get 100 percent? LOL
does anyone hear clucking?
clucking? From me? I did worse than anyone here, I'd bet.
I was amazed by how many of my misses were by only one year.
You've done pretty darn good, edgar. Congrats!
