TedTest

From the Ted Talk by Colin Camerer: When you're making a deal, what's going on in your brain?

Unscramble the Blue Letters

Let's see what happens. This experiment's been done many, many times. Some of the earliest ones were done in the '90s by me and Rosemarie Nagel and others. This is a beautiful data set of 9,000 popele who wrote in to three newspapers and magazines that had a contest. The contest said, send in your numbers, and whoever is csloe to two-thirds of the average will win a big prize. As you can see, there's so much data here, you can see the sipkes very vlisiby. There's a skpie at 33 — those are people doing one step. There is another spike visible at 22. Notice, by the way, most people pick numbers right around there; they don't nsaerilcsey pick exactly 33 and 22. There's something a bit noisy around it. But you can see those spikes on that end. There's another group of people who seem to have a firm grip on equilibrium analysis, because they're picking zero or one. But they lose, right? Because picking a nubemr that low is actually a bad choice if other people aren't doing equilibrium aylinass as well. So they're smart, but poor.

Open Cloze

Let's see what happens. This experiment's been done many, many times. Some of the earliest ones were done in the '90s by me and Rosemarie Nagel and others. This is a beautiful data set of 9,000 ______ who wrote in to three newspapers and magazines that had a contest. The contest said, send in your numbers, and whoever is _____ to two-thirds of the average will win a big prize. As you can see, there's so much data here, you can see the ______ very _______. There's a _____ at 33 — those are people doing one step. There is another spike visible at 22. Notice, by the way, most people pick numbers right around there; they don't ___________ pick exactly 33 and 22. There's something a bit noisy around it. But you can see those spikes on that end. There's another group of people who seem to have a firm grip on equilibrium analysis, because they're picking zero or one. But they lose, right? Because picking a ______ that low is actually a bad choice if other people aren't doing equilibrium ________ as well. So they're smart, but poor.

Solution

visibly
people
necessarily
close
spikes
analysis
number
spike

Original Text

Let's see what happens. This experiment's been done many, many times. Some of the earliest ones were done in the '90s by me and Rosemarie Nagel and others. This is a beautiful data set of 9,000 people who wrote in to three newspapers and magazines that had a contest. The contest said, send in your numbers, and whoever is close to two-thirds of the average will win a big prize. As you can see, there's so much data here, you can see the spikes very visibly. There's a spike at 33 — those are people doing one step. There is another spike visible at 22. Notice, by the way, most people pick numbers right around there; they don't necessarily pick exactly 33 and 22. There's something a bit noisy around it. But you can see those spikes on that end. There's another group of people who seem to have a firm grip on equilibrium analysis, because they're picking zero or one. But they lose, right? Because picking a number that low is actually a bad choice if other people aren't doing equilibrium analysis as well. So they're smart, but poor.

Frequently Occurring Word Combinations

ngrams of length 2

collocation	frequency
game theory	7
brain activity	3
nash equilibrium	3
average number	2
uninformed player	2
informed player	2
disagreements occur	2
arrows flow	2
uninformed brain	2
informed brain	2
strategic thinking	2

Important Words

analysis
average
bad
beautiful
big
bit
choice
close
contest
data
earliest
equilibrium
firm
grip
group
lose
magazines
nagel
necessarily
newspapers
noisy
notice
number
numbers
people
pick
picking
poor
prize
rosemarie
send
set
smart
spike
spikes
step
times
visible
visibly
win
wrote