A quick puzzle to test your problem solving

[revnort]

According to their logic I have the mind of a kindergartner. :|

Not exactly, they said children in kindergarten understand the simpler rule. Potentially because they don't know enough to make it more complicated.

It’s a lot more pleasant to hear “yes.” That, in a nutshell, is why so many people struggle with this problem.

Confirmation Bias

This disappointment is a version of what psychologists and economists call confirmation bias. Not only are people more likely to believe information that fits their pre-existing beliefs, but they’re also more likely to go looking for such information. This experiment is a version of one that the English psychologist Peter Cathcart Wason used in a seminal 1960 paper on confirmation bias. (He used the even simpler 2, 4 and 6, rather than our 2, 4 and 8.)

 

[NorCalAthlete]

Admittedly my initial thought was "2, 4, 8...ok, so first term raised to the nth power". Which worked fine for 3, 4, 5, etc as base case. Except I made a typo on one and put in "4, 16, 65" for the sequence and it was like "YES!" and I went wait...what? A bit more checking showed the a<b<c.

 

[revnort]

Admittedly my initial thought was "2, 4, 8...ok, so first term raised to the nth power". Which worked fine for 3, 4, 5, etc as base case. Except I made a typo on one and put in "4, 16, 65" for the sequence and it was like "YES!" and I went wait...what? A bit more checking showed the a<b<c.

Admittedly it took me a second to figure out how they wanted me to write the answer. I settled on "ascending order".

 

[DReg350]

I was thinking X x 2 x 2. Tried it three times and got three yeses. Tried...

1,2,4
3,6,12
4,8,16

Then the explanation popped up. TL;DR.

 

[sckego]

Remarkably, 78 percent of people who have played this game so far have guessed the answer without first hearing a single no. A mere 9 percent heard at least three nos.

Srsly? I can't believe that many people have so little sense of logic...

 

[RightCoastBias]

I also thought it was doubling at first. But wanted to keep going until I got something wrong.

So I entered something like 1 55 6000 and it said "Yes". I was a bit confused, but after a few more, I figured it out.

 

[tuxumino]

I think I get it, I assumed because I was getting correct answers that my rule was the correct one with out testing to see if I got a false answer that would have revealed that my rule was incorrect.

 

[mosquito]

Yeah, Tux.

I'm disappointed, but interested that I got it wrong. I said, "Two times the first number plus the second number equals the third number. The numbers must increase in value." I tested, but didn't test enough to eliminate my first guess.

I think it's also interesting that the phrasing had an emotional impact on me: "Make sure you’re right; you won’t get a second chance. " I wanted to both get it right and come up with an answer more quickly.

 

[sandyxb]

Their first example of 2,4,8 instills confirmation bias by implying there is a higher mathematical operation than just > . The test biases the person-under-test and is thus invalid

 

[carries an axe]

Their first example of 2,4,8 instills confirmation bias by implying there is a higher mathematical operation than just > . The test biases the person-under-test and is thus invalid

was my thought as well
However I question my own bias and simply accepted I was wrong as a healthy practice

 

[CABilly]

My answer was exactly word for word the answer, and I even tested it out searching for reproducible "no" and "yes" answers based on sequence criteria.

So i methodically approached a silly Internet game to prove my ability to be right, and wound up being right. I am my own confirmation bias.

 

[Mike95060]

I got it right but the trick is to be smart enough to know how to get the wrong answer and thus test your assumption. I fell for it. I is not as smart as I thought I was.

 

[jh2586]

So wait, I got a bunch of 'YESs'' initially but it wasn't good enough. I needed to see 'NOs'. In fact, I tested it several times until I got several of both and came to the basic rule of ascending order.

Is that confirmation bias? I think testing something extensively isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as you are subject to disproving equally to proving your theory.

 

[Yakoo752]

So wait, I got a bunch of 'YESs'' initially but it wasn't good enough. I needed to see 'NOs'. In fact, I tested it several times until I got several of both and came to the basic rule of ascending order.

Is that confirmation bias? I think testing something extensively isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as you are subject to disproving equally to proving your theory.

No - confirmation bias is testing until it has satisfied your first perceived rule and stopping.

You kept going - thus likely altering your first perceived rule

testing extensively should be how we do things.

(it's assumed the first perceived rule is one of doubling)

 

[CABilly]

No - confirmation bias is testing until it has satisfied your first perceived rule and stopping.

You kept going - thus likely altering your first perceived rule

testing extensively should be how we do things.

(it's assumed the first perceived rule is one of doubling)

My whole college degree was built on confirmation bias. Research paper every few weeks? There's plenty out there to back up a hypothesis I don't care about.

 

[JackTheTripper]

Your guesses:
4 8 16 Yes!
3 9 81 Yes!
42 84 168 Yes!
1 2 3 Yes!
2 1 3 No.
3 2 1 No.
3 6 9 Yes!
4 5 6 Yes!
4 4 5 No.
4 6 73 Yes!
54 45221 54845515 Yes!

Nailed it!

 

[sckego]

Your guesses:
4 8 16 Yes!
3 9 81 Yes!
42 84 168 Yes!
1 2 3 Yes!
2 1 3 No.
3 2 1 No.
3 6 9 Yes!
4 5 6 Yes!
4 4 5 No.
4 6 73 Yes!
54 45221 54845515 Yes!

Nailed it!

Not really. What if the rule was that the 2nd number must be greater than the first number, and the 3rd number is irrelevant.... every example you posed would still be correct per that rule. You never checked that the third number mattered at all.

 

[revnort]

 

[enki]

I like guys column

 

[RightCoastBias]

I like guys column

How big is his column?