Quote from: thalaw2 on January 04, 2008, 06:15:52 PM
I like the fact that the survey only allows you to agree or disagree.  No fence riding or not caring.  If you really know yourself and (to some extent) are comfortable with who you are and where you stand then there are no problems.  Perhaps some people have a problem with the questions because they are not willing to admit certain things about themselves to themselves.  If you really have to "pull the trigger" and peoples lives or social welfare are stake...then where will you go?

Mmmm, no, I have a problem with some of the statements because they're not logically consistent as a whole, and yet I'm asked to respond as if they make some kind of sense.

For example, take this statement: "Because puppies are adorable, Marvel fans are superior to DC fans." You probably agree with the first part about puppies being adorable. You may or may not agree with the second part of the statement. Even if you agree with *both* parts of the statement, though, the statement makes no logical sense: the alleged superiorty of Marvel fans just doesn't follow logically from the adorableness of puppies. So if you respond based on the statement as a whole, you'd be forced to disagree even though you agree with its component parts.

In some cases the authors seem to be thinking, "Hah! If you disagree with this then you've shown that you hate puppies!" when in fact what you're trying to say is the authors are engaging in fuzzy thinking when they wrote the statement.

A lot of these 'Net quizzes have similar issues. Of course, flaws in the questionare design don't seem quite as important when you're trying to determine which one of the Smurfs you are.... :)

Quote from: HumanTon on January 04, 2008, 09:54:13 PM
For example, take this statement: "Because puppies are adorable, Marvel fans are superior to DC fans."

but i don't agree with either of those statements.

Quote from: Mr. Hamrick on January 04, 2008, 10:11:02 PM
but i don't agree with either of those statements.

Then clearly you are Grouchy Smurf.  :P

Quote from: HumanTon on January 04, 2008, 10:14:34 PM

Quote from: Mr. Hamrick on January 04, 2008, 10:11:02 PM
but i don't agree with either of those statements.

Then clearly you are Grouchy Smurf.  :P

well, DUH!!

Quote from: HumanTon on January 04, 2008, 09:54:13 PM

Quote from: thalaw2 on January 04, 2008, 06:15:52 PM
I like the fact that the survey only allows you to agree or disagree.  No fence riding or not caring.  If you really know yourself and (to some extent) are comfortable with who you are and where you stand then there are no problems.  Perhaps some people have a problem with the questions because they are not willing to admit certain things about themselves to themselves.  If you really have to "pull the trigger" and peoples lives or social welfare are stake...then where will you go?

Mmmm, no, I have a problem with some of the statements because they're not logically consistent as a whole, and yet I'm asked to respond as if they make some kind of sense.

For example, take this statement: "Because puppies are adorable, Marvel fans are superior to DC fans." You probably agree with the first part about puppies being adorable. You may or may not agree with the second part of the statement. Even if you agree with *both* parts of the statement, though, the statement makes no logical sense: the alleged superiorty of Marvel fans just doesn't follow logically from the adorableness of puppies. So if you respond based on the statement as a whole, you'd be forced to disagree even though you agree with its component parts.

In some cases the authors seem to be thinking, "Hah! If you disagree with this then you've shown that you hate puppies!" when in fact what you're trying to say is the authors are engaging in fuzzy thinking when they wrote the statement.

A lot of these 'Net quizzes have similar issues. Of course, flaws in the questionare design don't seem quite as important when you're trying to determine which one of the Smurfs you are.... :)

While I can't speak to other net quizzes, whether or not you agree with such statements is the entire reason they are in this one. 

Quote from: Uncle Yuan on January 05, 2008, 04:23:59 AM
While I can't speak to other net quizzes, whether or not you agree with such statements is the entire reason they are in this one. 

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

But which statement? The puppies statement? The Marvel vs. DC statement? Or the overall statement, which is nonsense no matter how you slice it?

FWIW, the test did an OK job of identifiying me ... but only because I threw logic and my own nuanced opinions out the window and answered according to what the authors appreared to think were hot button issues to them. In the above case that would mean agreeing, because clearly the author felt disagreeing with any statement about puppies being adorable meant I should be classified as a Grouchy Smurf. (Whereas to my mind disagreeing with the nonsensical overall statement ought to classify me as Brainy Smurf.  :D )

A quiz about my beliefs that has me spending more time trying to outguess the author's intentions than thinking about my own beliefs isn't very well designed, to my way of thinking.

According to the test designers, believing that puppies being adorable has bearing on comic fandom is characteristic of a certain segment of political ideology, while rejecting the relationship is characteristic of another.  I can see the merit of this point of view - all surveys are only an approximation of real views after all - although we can argue about the specific generalizations drawn.

One problem I have with this quiz is that it equates people's philosophical views with their political views, which may or may not be accurate. For example, if someone believes that the universe is controlled by pre-ordained forces, they may want as much free choice built into their political system as possible, to compensate in some way, or, if they believe that the universe is a random, chaotic place, they might believe that society needs a lot of structure to counteract that. The quiz doesn't seem to allow for these kinds of beliefs.

I also think the creators of the quiz underestimate how differently different people's minds can work- but, then, I think pretty much everyone has that problem.

(Note- when I came across a statement I thought was a logical fallacy, I simply disagreed with the statement, since even if I believed one or both of the statements involved was correct, I disagreed that one led to the other. I don't have a problem inherently with the quiz including statements like that- we're being asked to agree or disagree with a statement, not to mark our positions on issues.)

The less directly political the statement, the more assumptions must be made to attribute any political meaning to the response and the less confidence one can have that said meaning really applies to the respondent's political views. It would be far more definitive to actually get responses to direct statements rather than to make shaky inferences based on responses to tenuously connected statements.

Like I said, the way the quiz uses some of these responses to move a respondent along an axis implies as much about the political assumptions of the survey designers as it does about the respondent's politics.

Quote from: Uncle Yuan on January 05, 2008, 04:23:59 AM

Quote from: HumanTon on January 04, 2008, 09:54:13 PM

Quote from: thalaw2 on January 04, 2008, 06:15:52 PM
I like the fact that the survey only allows you to agree or disagree.  No fence riding or not caring.  If you really know yourself and (to some extent) are comfortable with who you are and where you stand then there are no problems.  Perhaps some people have a problem with the questions because they are not willing to admit certain things about themselves to themselves.  If you really have to "pull the trigger" and peoples lives or social welfare are stake...then where will you go?

Mmmm, no, I have a problem with some of the statements because they're not logically consistent as a whole, and yet I'm asked to respond as if they make some kind of sense.

For example, take this statement: "Because puppies are adorable, Marvel fans are superior to DC fans." You probably agree with the first part about puppies being adorable. You may or may not agree with the second part of the statement. Even if you agree with *both* parts of the statement, though, the statement makes no logical sense: the alleged superiorty of Marvel fans just doesn't follow logically from the adorableness of puppies. So if you respond based on the statement as a whole, you'd be forced to disagree even though you agree with its component parts.

In some cases the authors seem to be thinking, "Hah! If you disagree with this then you've shown that you hate puppies!" when in fact what you're trying to say is the authors are engaging in fuzzy thinking when they wrote the statement.

A lot of these 'Net quizzes have similar issues. Of course, flaws in the questionare design don't seem quite as important when you're trying to determine which one of the Smurfs you are.... :)

While I can't speak to other net quizzes, whether or not you agree with such statements is the entire reason they are in this one. 

Maybe I was dropped when I was a baby, because I don't see what's so hard about answering that question about puppies and Marvel fans.  If I disagree then I don't believe that "Marvel fans are superior to DC fans, because puppies are adorable."   If I agree then I believe that it is because puppies are adorable that Marvel fans are superior to DC fans...I see the question as a whole and not as separate unrelated parts.  If you address the whole question then you don't have any problems with separate parts...in this case it's not asking if I believe that puppies or adorable or if I believe that "Marvel fans are superior to DC fans".  It's about the relation of puppies being adorable having an affect on Marvel fans and DC fans.  At least that's how I see it.

It's very easy for me to agree or disagree...it doesn't mean that I'm right, but I know about my beliefs with respect to puppies and comic fans.

Quote from: thalaw2 on January 05, 2008, 09:08:00 PM

Quote from: Uncle Yuan on January 05, 2008, 04:23:59 AM

Quote from: HumanTon on January 04, 2008, 09:54:13 PM

Quote from: thalaw2 on January 04, 2008, 06:15:52 PM
I like the fact that the survey only allows you to agree or disagree.  No fence riding or not caring.  If you really know yourself and (to some extent) are comfortable with who you are and where you stand then there are no problems.  Perhaps some people have a problem with the questions because they are not willing to admit certain things about themselves to themselves.  If you really have to "pull the trigger" and peoples lives or social welfare are stake...then where will you go?

Mmmm, no, I have a problem with some of the statements because they're not logically consistent as a whole, and yet I'm asked to respond as if they make some kind of sense.

For example, take this statement: "Because puppies are adorable, Marvel fans are superior to DC fans." You probably agree with the first part about puppies being adorable. You may or may not agree with the second part of the statement. Even if you agree with *both* parts of the statement, though, the statement makes no logical sense: the alleged superiorty of Marvel fans just doesn't follow logically from the adorableness of puppies. So if you respond based on the statement as a whole, you'd be forced to disagree even though you agree with its component parts.

In some cases the authors seem to be thinking, "Hah! If you disagree with this then you've shown that you hate puppies!" when in fact what you're trying to say is the authors are engaging in fuzzy thinking when they wrote the statement.

A lot of these 'Net quizzes have similar issues. Of course, flaws in the questionare design don't seem quite as important when you're trying to determine which one of the Smurfs you are.... :)

While I can't speak to other net quizzes, whether or not you agree with such statements is the entire reason they are in this one. 

Maybe I was dropped when I was a baby, because I don't see what's so hard about answering that question about puppies and Marvel fans.  If I disagree then I don't believe that "Marvel fans are superior to DC fans, because puppies are adorable."   If I agree then I believe that it is because puppies are adorable that Marvel fans are superior to DC fans...I see the question as a whole and not as separate unrelated parts.  If you address the whole question then you don't have any problems with separate parts...in this case it's not asking if I believe that puppies or adorable or if I believe that "Marvel fans are superior to DC fans".  It's about the relation of puppies being adorable having an affect on Marvel fans and DC fans.  At least that's how I see it.

It's very easy for me to agree or disagree...it doesn't mean that I'm right, but I know about my beliefs with respect to puppies and comic fans.

They are two separate questions, though.  Assigning a correlation between the two is where things get really dicey.  The question of A does not and should affect B.  Consequently, your answer to B should bear no effect on A.   However, the two questions are put together in very "Cause and Effect" type manner.  "Because you feel this way about question A then you must feel this way question B."  You're not actually answer question B, your answer for B is filled in because of how you answered A.

 :doh:  :huh: :huh::huh:

It seems to be simple logic...if not A then not B...if A then B

For this B does not equal not A and A does not equal not B

The possibilities are endless. 

You can't reverse the question to ask if B then A...that's not what was given.  As my music teacher used to say "Play the music as it's written"

Quote from: thalaw2 on January 06, 2008, 12:20:26 AM
:doh:  :huh: :huh::huh:

It seems to be simple logic...if not A then not B...if A then B

For this B does not equal not A and A does not equal not B

The possibilities are endless. 

You can't reverse the question to ask if B then A...that's not what was given.  As my music teacher used to say "Play the music as it's written"

However, you can lead you to believe that A must ALWAYS equal B even if A does NOT ALWAYS equal B.  The way the quiz is set up is based on certain stereotypical logic and principles.  They even acknowledge this in the FAQ but try to write it off as "just one side saying they are biased toward the other side".  There is a difference between being biased and having a logistical flaw.  Or for that matter a flaw in the way you set up the equation.

For some reason the political compass link just doesn't work for me, so I did an Ask.com search and found THIS SURVEY, which tries to improve upon the Political Compass one.  They even list the questions which I found to be fairly well written.  TAKE A LOOK.  Is it better?

Quote from: Mr. Hamrick on January 05, 2008, 11:23:45 PM

They are two separate questions, though.  Assigning a correlation between the two is where things get really dicey.  The question of A does not and should affect B.  Consequently, your answer to B should bear no effect on A.   However, the two questions are put together in very "Cause and Effect" type manner.  "Because you feel this way about question A then you must feel this way question B."  You're not actually answer question B, your answer for B is filled in because of how you answered A.

But again, the whole point is to force you to respond to an illogical question in the theory that it reveals something about your political views.

Quote from: Pyroclasm on January 06, 2008, 05:13:42 AM
For some reason the political compass link just doesn't work for me, so I did an Ask.com search and found THIS SURVEY, which tries to improve upon the Political Compass one.  They even list the questions which I found to be fairly well written.  TAKE A LOOK.  Is it better?

I think the other one was much more accurate for me. I also noticed that some of the questions in this one were esentailly asked twice, worded a little differently.

Quote from: Alaric on January 06, 2008, 07:52:36 AM
I think the other one was much more accurate for me. I also noticed that some of the questions in this one were esentailly asked twice, worded a little differently.

Yeah, that is mentioned in the FAQ.  It supposedly helps gauge what people REALLY think since sometimes opinions change depending on how the question is asked.

I feel the first is more accurate - on this one all my answers pretty nearly canceled out and I wound up very close to the origin of the graph.  While I readily admit I have widely disparate views on politics, I strongly feel that I am not a centrist, which this test would tend to suggest.

I appreciate that the second survey is more open about its methodology and the eigenspace decomposition of the questions. The academic in me considers that approach to be more "legitimate", though I understand there are sometimes reasons for a black box approach.

The statements in this second survey were typically more directly political, which is good for a political survey. And, I encountered far fewer statements where I sort of had to "decide which part of the statement I was agreeing with" because I agreed with a conclusion but not the premise or vice versa or couldn't fathom a legitimate connection between them.

But, my reaction to the result was similar to Uncle Yuan's in that I wound up in a spot on their plot where either I am not really there or I am really there and practically no one in the general public is where they think they are.

Part of the problem is that they've effectively eliminated the main positive feature of the first survey: the separation of politics along social and economic axes. Looking at the statement grading rubrik, the second survey seems to have collapsed the economic and social axes of the first survey back into what the second survey is calling its left/right axis. In other words, one's view on taxpayer-funded art can cancel out one's view on drug legalization. That puts us back to the too-simple left-right categories endorsed by the media, which I find to be inadequate.

Of course, they've added to that a pragmatism/idealism axis which is interesting, but I am more interested in the first two axes.

Sigh. Both surveys suffer from significant weaknesses, IMO. And, although the issues of self-selection and representative sampling are very legitimate, I am still interested in what the aggregate political leanings of the survey-takers are. I mean, I don't need a survey to tell me what my views are...

I think a big problem with the second survey is that it makes a lot of assumptions about what is "pragmatic" and what is "idealistic". I think these terms better describe how someone arrives at their possition than what that possition actually is. Two people can hold the same view on a given issue, with one holding that view for idealistic reasons and the other holding it for pragmatic reasons, while a third and a fourth person will reject that view for idealistic and pragmatic reasons, respectively.

Not bad...it lumped me with some fine company. The problem is that many of the questions, I felt were too simplistic, or else needed more specifics. But I find this in any of these quizes.

Perhaps it would be better if the second test eschewed "pragmatism" and "idealism" and instead adopted something similar to the first test's "social" and "economic."  Perhaps the addition of a third axis for pragmatism and idealism?  Whatever the case, there should be two tests, or just one test taken twice: once to discern what you personally believe, but one what you think the government's policies should be.  Personally, I lean towards one end of the political spectrum, but I don't want a government to adopt my views as they stand because I know that would create chaos for all the other people who disagree with me.  That's something missing on both tests, although the second's pragmatism/idealism scale is an effort to resolve this problem.