Smarter than a monkey (about science) test.

[PB666]

http://www.pewresearch.org/quiz/science-knowledge/results/

Take a look at the results, a monkey score is 3 or less, a monkey could if taking the test 20 times score an 8 but a sizable fraction of americans could not reach that score. Forty percent of americans score lower than a monkey best score if he took the test 20 times. 3 percent of americans scored lower than a monkey.

Spoilers.......

http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-science-and-society/

http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/09/2015-09-10_science-knowledge_TOPLINE.pdf

[Slam_Jones]

Hello, sorry, trying to find where it references the monkey's answers... don't seem to see it. Or any use of the word "monkey" or "ape" on any of the three pages linked. Maybe I missed it?

Also, just curious, how were these questions presented to the monkey? Does it actually comprehend what it's being asked, or is it picking random ones? Are we actually testing how much a monkey knows about science, or it's ability to push buttons?

Edited September 15, 2015 by Slam_Jones

[Shpaget]

It's statistical probability that when presented with 12 questions, each with 4 possible answers and you pick answers at random you'll get, on average, 3 answers correct.

It is also statistically probable that when given the opportunity to go through the test multiple times, at least some of the time you'll get more than 3 answers correct, up to and including all 12.

[Slam_Jones]

Okay, fair enough. The monkey just represents random choices. So the point is... what? That some people would do better on the test if they chose randomly?

I know plenty of Americans are dull (I am an American, after all) but is that the only point? "Lol, Murikans are dumber than monkeys" seems to be the overlying theme, as near as I can tell.

Edited September 15, 2015 by Slam_Jones

[Randazzo]

Okay, fair enough. The monkey just represents random choices. So the point is... what? That some people would do better on the test if they chose randomly?

I know plenty of Americans are dull (I am an American, after all) but is that the only point? "Lol, Murikans are dumber than monkeys" seems to be the overlying theme, as near as I can tell.

3% of those who took the test (3,278 people total). About 100 of those people only got three correct. You'd want to include those who got fewer correct as well, so ~5% (about 164 people).

How did they choose this cross section of people? Carefully, so the outcome would be as they desired?

[Camacha]

12/12. Conclusion: I am four monkeys.

[GeneralVeers]

ALERT: BUZZKILL APPROACHING. TAKE EVASIVE ACTION.

Quiz irrelevant because monkeys don't understand the answers they're giving. If you flip a coin and the coin happens to fall on the correct answer, the coin is still an inanimate piece of metal and still has zero intelligence.

[Camacha]

Quiz irrelevant because monkeys don't understand the answers they're giving. If you flip a coin and the coin happens to fall on the correct answer, the coin is still an inanimate piece of metal and still has zero intelligence.

The difference is that a coin can never give answers, while a moderately trained monkey certainly can. That distinction eliminates your objection.

Do not mind me while I turn the buzz back on.

[Slam_Jones]

The difference is that a coin can never give answers, while a moderately trained monkey certainly can. That distinction eliminates your objection.

Do not mind me while I turn the buzz back on.

So a monkey is going to know the difference between astronomy and astrology?

Sorry, unless the monkey fully understands the question (and all answers are otherwise equal in reward), the answer is as random as a coin flip.

[Camacha]

So a monkey is going to know the difference between astronomy and astrology?

Sorry, unless the monkey fully understands the question (and all answers are otherwise equal in reward), the answer is as random as a coin flip.

I said neither of those things. I said that it is about intelligence when it comes to monkeys, and it is not when talking about coins. A monkey can give answers (regardless whether it understands the matter), a coin can not.

The problem here is that no one asked actual monkeys.

[Superfluous J]

12/12 and I'll admit I didn't actually know the answer to one of them. I was able to eliminate the other 3 answers so just picked what was left.

I will gladly take my 4 monkeys parcel post to the included address. Bonobos, if possible.

[Kerbart]

3% of those who took the test (3,278 people total). About 100 of those people only got three correct. You'd want to include those who got fewer correct as well, so ~5% (about 164 people).

How did they choose this cross section of people? Carefully, so the outcome would be as they desired?

I don't think they specifically choose. I did that survey (100% score, thank you) and it was one of those "how smart are you" kind of surveys distrubed through social media. Somebody posted it on a photography forum and that's how I found out about it. I usually don't do them but pew research has a pretty good rep in my book so I was willing to try it.

[Tex_NL]

12/12 and I'll admit I didn't actually know the answer to one of them. I was able to eliminate the other 3 answers so just picked what was left.

I will gladly take my 4 monkeys parcel post to the included address. Bonobos, if possible.

Same here: 12/12 and indeed there was a question I did not know the answer to. But I was absolutely sure the other 4 answers were dead wrong.

[PB666]

ALERT: BUZZKILL APPROACHING. TAKE EVASIVE ACTION.

Quiz irrelevant because monkeys don't understand the answers they're giving. If you flip a coin and the coin happens to fall on the correct answer, the coin is still an inanimate piece of metal and still has zero intelligence.

If you trained a monkey to answer only one per test question, it would because of the test design score slightly more on average than 3.5. The monkey score was a term commonly used at the med. school to apprise the teachings staff of repeaters, cause if you got the monkey score you would have to repeat the class.

Monkey score means essentially that ind. X knows nothing at all about the topic, X is oblivious, that X probably should not ever speak about global warming or evolution or topics of that due to X's complete and utter ignorance on science related issues. The Pew institute if you read the whole of the links that public opinion on science issues often markedly varies on scientist opinion on the same issue.

I suspect that if a monkey can read he/she might on average score higher than the monkey score.

[Scotius]

11\12. So i'm smarter than 3 2\3 monkeys. Then again - how did they got monkeys to answer those questions?

[PB666]

11\12. So i'm smarter than 3 2\3 monkeys. Then again - how did they got monkeys to answer those questions?

Bananas

[Dkmdlb]

12/12 and I'll admit I didn't actually know the answer to one of them. I was able to eliminate the other 3 answers so just picked what was left.

Which question? Was it the magnifying glass one?

[Camacha]

11\12. So i'm smarter than 3 2\3 monkeys. Then again - how did they got monkeys to answer those questions?

With patience and a fair amount of distance between them and the monkeys.

[PB666]

So a monkey is going to know the difference between astronomy and astrology?

Sorry, unless the monkey fully understands the question (and all answers are otherwise equal in reward), the answer is as random as a coin flip.

You assume Americans do, many skipped to the next one failing to answer. What you probably mean is whether a monkey realized it is being asked a question.

- - - Updated - - -

Which question? Was it the magnifying glass one?

Well I had trouble with the tides question, I reread it and the word "main" basically placed one answer above the rest. No answers as a result of an exclusion process.

Although the question about Jonas Salk is not fair, because this is name recognition and not about abstract science content, most americans in their 50s and 60s should have some recollection of Polio, it was something kindo of biggish in school. It should have been for extra credit. (12 of 12).

Oddly the magnifying glass one I remembered frying ants as a kid, that convex lens focus parallel rays of sunlight on a tiny object, like an ant and they sizzle, easy.

[LordFerret]

...

Although the question about Jonas Salk is not fair, because this is name recognition and not about abstract science content, most americans in their 50s and 60s should have some recollection of Polio, it was something kindo of biggish in school. ...

Considering Polio is making a comeback worldwide, I would think knowledge of the vaccine creator to be more than just 'name recognition'... or the fact the vaccine is still viable.

12 of 12.

[PB666]

Considering Polio is making a comeback worldwide, I would think knowledge of the vaccine creator to be more than just 'name recognition'... or the fact the vaccine is still viable.

12 of 12.

I don't like science focused on the personality, not so much the science. Aside, if you were a kid in the sixties you have this new drug and people are talking about a new affective vaccine, its novelty was part of the news. Its sort of like how famous einstein was after the atomic bomb was dropped. Or madam curie back in the early 20th. The salk vaccine just sticks in your head if you are of the sixties.

[GeneralVeers]

The difference is that a coin can never give answers, while a moderately trained monkey certainly can.

Which they don't understand unless it's something along the lines of 2 + 2 = ?

Even birds can do that one. Ask them what's the capital of Iraq? I don't think any animal trainer has ever been able to teach that one to any of their charges.

[LordFerret]

I don't like science focused on the personality, not so much the science. Aside, if you were a kid in the sixties you have this new drug and people are talking about a new affective vaccine, its novelty was part of the news. Its sort of like how famous einstein was after the atomic bomb was dropped. Or madam curie back in the early 20th. The salk vaccine just sticks in your head if you are of the sixties.

I'll disagree with that. Being a child of the late 50's and early 60's, you were more aware of those afflicted by polio of the previous generation... and Salk's vaccine was a godsend, the novelty you speak of was entirely of the media's doing*. For that matter, Sabin's name is/was just as recognizable. Now, if you want to talk science focused on a personality, take a look at Dr. Spock and his baby book.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Salk#Celebrity_versus_privacy

[PB666]

I'll disagree with that. Being a child of the late 50's and early 60's, you were more aware of those afflicted by polio of the previous generation... and Salk's vaccine was a godsend, the novelty you speak of was entirely of the media's doing*. For that matter, Sabin's name is/was just as recognizable. Now, if you want to talk science focused on a personality, take a look at Dr. Spock and his baby book.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Salk#Celebrity_versus_privacy

Yeah, but people of the 50-70 bracket did better on the test. Sure i could have gueesed Salk by eliminating the others, but i didn't have to resort to logic or reasoning, just relied on raw memory. Contrast that to the tide question. What are the forcing tides

1. Gravity moon earth

2. Fluidity of water at earth surface temperatures

3. The timing of tides is dependent on the rotation of the earth

4. The amplitude is dependent on the earth moon distance which is indirectly dependent on the earths rotation and tide

5. The sun also tides but the gravitational attraction is much less

So now we have concepts, so what is the primary, in this we consider the target, earths large oceans. This leaves 1 and 3, one determines the amplitude and the other is timing. just about any rotation will cause tides, even if the earth did not rotate, the moons cuurent orbit wiill cause tides, so weighing the two it leaves moon's gravity as what the questions intent was trying to extract.

[tygoo7]

I got 12/12.