The Upshot has discovered that people have difficulty understanding uncertainty:

We think a quantitative forecast can help people to take a step back from obsessing over the latest daily poll release. By averaging polls together and arriving at a probabilistic forecast, the aim is to help people take a more nuanced view of the campaign, one that is less driven by whatever the latest polling number happens to be, and instead summarizes all of the available evidence, with the context of history.



Write A Comment

But we humans are bad at understanding uncertainty. Reactions to Mr. Trump’s victory suggest that, despite our efforts, we failed at explaining that an 85 percent chance is not a 100 percent chance. If we did it all again, we would probably emphasize uncertainty in a more visceral way, rather than using a simple statement of probability, an analogy to a real-world event like an N.F.L. field goal or a shaded margin of error.

By more effectively communicating the uncertainty in the world, we’d hope to give our readers a more useful indicator of the state of the race — one that is built on data rather than anecdote and conjecture.

via www.nytimes.com

A mathematician friend of mine wasn't happy when there was a 93% chance of winning. He wanted 100%. He understands probabilities.

Posted in
  1. John M Avatar

    Would your mathematician friend have accepted 98%? How about 99%? What about 99.5%? Is there any positive value of epsilon for which he would have accepted 100% – epsilon?
    If not, your mathematician friend doesn’t understand probabilities.
    I agree that humans have trouble understanding probabilities and uncertainties. All too often, people dread 1/10^6 probable disasters than 1/10^2 probable disasters, even when the harm is the same.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Environmental Economics

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading