One human subject was removed from the experiment for having prior familiarity with the Monty Hall problem.
One participant in Condition
1 was eliminated due to prior familiarity with the Monty Hall Dilemma, leaving 6
participants in each condition.
“Condition one” refers to a setup following the standard Monty Haul Problem. “Condition two” reversed the probabilities (by assigning the “correct” choice after the subject made their first choice).
One human subject was removed from the experiment for having prior familiarity with the Monty Hall problem.
This is a commendable effort to make this a controlled experiment. OTOH, I have to wonder if the sort of person who would be likely to learn about/understand the monty hall problem would also, before learning about the problem, be better at solving it than a pigeon. That is, does actually knowing too much about the problem to be in the study correlate with other mental attributes that would enable a human to beat a pigeon (statistical interest and understanding, rationality, etc)?
One human subject was removed from the experiment for having prior familiarity with the Monty Hall problem.
“Condition one” refers to a setup following the standard Monty Haul Problem. “Condition two” reversed the probabilities (by assigning the “correct” choice after the subject made their first choice).
This is a commendable effort to make this a controlled experiment. OTOH, I have to wonder if the sort of person who would be likely to learn about/understand the monty hall problem would also, before learning about the problem, be better at solving it than a pigeon. That is, does actually knowing too much about the problem to be in the study correlate with other mental attributes that would enable a human to beat a pigeon (statistical interest and understanding, rationality, etc)?