2014 Survey Results

Thanks to ev­ery­one who took the 2014 Less Wrong Cen­sus/​Sur­vey. Ex­tra thanks to Ozy, who did a lot of the num­ber crunch­ing work.

This year’s re­sults are be­low. Some of them may make more sense in the con­text of the origi­nal sur­vey ques­tions, which can be seen here. Please do not try to take the sur­vey as it is over and your re­sults will not be counted.

I. Population

There were 1503 re­spon­dents over 27 days. The last sur­vey got 1636 peo­ple over 40 days. The last four full days of the sur­vey saw nine­teen, six, and four re­sponses, for an av­er­age of about ten. If we as­sume the next thir­teen days had also got­ten an av­er­age of ten re­sponses—which is gen­er­ous, since re­sponses tend to trail off with time—then we would have got­ten about as many peo­ple as the last sur­vey. There is no good ev­i­dence here of a de­cline in pop­u­la­tion, al­though it is per­haps com­pat­i­ble with a very small de­cline.

II. Demographics

Sex
Fe­male: 179, 11.9%
Male: 1311, 87.2%

Gen­der
F (cis­gen­der): 150, 10.0%
F (trans­gen­der MtF): 24, 1.6%
M (cis­gen­der): 1245, 82.8%
M (trans­gen­der FtM): 5, 0.3%
Other: 64, 4.3%

Sex­ual Ori­en­ta­tion
A­sex­ual: 59, 3.9%
Bi­sex­ual: 216, 14.4%
Hetero­sex­ual: 1133, 75.4%
Ho­mo­sex­ual: 47, 3.1%
Other: 35, 2.3%

[This ques­tion was poorly worded and should have ac­knowl­edged that peo­ple can both be asex­ual and have a spe­cific ori­en­ta­tion; as a re­sult it prob­a­bly vastly un­der­counted our asex­ual read­ers]

Re­la­tion­ship Style
Pre­fer monog­a­mous: 778, 51.8%
Pre­fer polyamorous: 227, 15.1%
Uncer­tain/​no prefer­ence: 464, 30.9%
Other: 23, 1.5%

Num­ber of Part­ners
0: 738, 49.1%
1: 674, 44.8%
2: 51, 3.4%
3: 17, 1.1%
4: 7, 0.5%
5: 1, 0.1%
Lots and lots: 3, 0.2%

Re­la­tion­ship Goals
Cur­rently not look­ing for new part­ners: 648, 43.1%
Open to new part­ners: 467, 31.1%
Seek­ing more part­ners: 370, 24.6%

[22.2% of peo­ple who don’t have a part­ner aren’t look­ing for one.]


Re­la­tion­ship Sta­tus
Mar­ried: 274, 18.2%
Re­la­tion­ship: 424, 28.2%
Sin­gle: 788, 52.4%

[6.9% of sin­gle peo­ple have at least one part­ner; 1.8% have more than one.]

Liv­ing With
Alone: 345, 23.0%
With par­ents and/​or guardians: 303, 20.2%
With part­ner and/​or chil­dren: 411, 27.3%
With room­mates: 428, 28.5%

Chil­dren
0: 1317, 81.6%
1: 66, 4.4%
2: 78, 5.2%
3: 17, 1.1%
4: 6, 0.4%
5: 3, 0.2%
6: 1, 0.1%
Lots and lots: 1, 0.1%

Want More Chil­dren?
Yes: 549, 36.1%
Uncer­tain: 426, 28.3%
No: 516, 34.3%

[418 of the peo­ple who don’t have chil­dren don’t want any, sug­gest­ing that the LW com­mu­nity is 27.8% child­free.]

Coun­try
United States, 822, 54.7%
United King­dom, 116, 7.7%
Canada, 88, 5.9%
Aus­tralia: 83, 5.5%
Ger­many, 62, 4.1%
Rus­sia, 26, 1.7%
Fin­land, 20, 1.3%
New Zealand, 20, 1.3%
In­dia, 17, 1.1%
Brazil: 15, 1.0%
France, 15, 1.0%
Is­rael, 15, 1.0%

Less­wrongers Per Cap­i­ta
Fin­land: 1271,950
New Zealand: 1223,550
Aus­tralia: 1278,674
United States: 1358,390
Canada: 1399,545
Is­rael: 1537,266
United King­dom: 1552,586
Ger­many: 11,290,323
France: 1/​ 4,402,000
Rus­sia: 1/​ 5,519,231
Brazil: 1/​ 13,360,000
In­dia: 1/​ 73,647,058

Race
Asian (East Asian): 59. 3.9%
Asian (In­dian sub­con­ti­nent): 33, 2.2%
Black: 12. 0.8%
His­panic: 32, 2.1%
Mid­dle Eastern: 9, 0.6%
Other: 50, 3.3%
White (non-His­panic): 1294, 86.1%

Work Sta­tus
A­ca­demic (teach­ing): 86, 5.7%
For-profit work: 492, 32.7%
Govern­ment work: 59, 3.9%
Homemaker: 8, 0.5%
In­de­pen­dently wealthy: 9, 0.6%
Non­profit work: 58, 3.9%
Self-em­ployed: 122, 5.8%
Stu­dent: 553, 36.8%
Unem­ployed: 103, 6.9%

Pro­fes­sion
Art: 22, 1.5%
Biol­ogy: 29, 1.9%
Busi­ness: 35, 4.0%
Com­put­ers (AI): 42, 2.8%
Com­put­ers (other aca­demic): 106, 7.1%
Com­put­ers (prac­ti­cal): 477, 31.7%
Eng­ineer­ing: 104, 6.1%
Fi­nance/​Eco­nomics: 71, 4.7%
Law: 38, 2.5%
Math­e­mat­ics: 121, 8.1%
Medicine: 32, 2.1%
Neu­ro­science: 18, 1.2%
Philos­o­phy: 36, 2.4%
Physics: 65, 4.3%
Psy­chol­ogy: 31, 2.1%
Other: 157, 10.2%
Other “hard sci­ence”: 25, 1.7%
Other “so­cial sci­ence”: 34, 2.3%

De­gree
None: 74, 4.9%
High school: 347, 23.1%
2 year de­gree: 64, 4.3%
Bach­e­lors: 555, 36.9%
Masters: 278, 18.5%
JD/​MD/​other pro­fes­sional de­gree: 44, 2.9%
PhD: 105, 7.0%
Other: 24, 1.4%

III. Men­tal Illness

535 an­swer “no” to all the men­tal ill­ness ques­tions. Up­per bound: 64.4% of the LW pop­u­la­tion is men­tally ill.
393 an­swer “yes” to at least one men­tal ill­ness ques­tion. Lower bound: 26.1% of the LW pop­u­la­tion is men­tally ill. Gosh, we have a lot of self-di­ag­nosers.

De­pres­sion
Yes, I was for­mally di­ag­nosed: 273, 18.2%
Yes, I self-di­ag­nosed: 383, 25.5%
No: 759, 50.5%

OCD
Yes, I was for­mally di­ag­nosed: 30, 2.0%
Yes, I self-di­ag­nosed: 76, 5.1%
No: 1306, 86.9%

Autism spec­trum

Yes, I was for­mally di­ag­nosed: 98, 6.5%
Yes, I self-di­ag­nosed: 168, 11.2%
No: 1143, 76.0%

Bipo­lar

Yes, I was for­mally di­ag­nosed: 33, 2.2%
Yes, I self-di­ag­nosed: 49, 3.3%
No: 1327, 88.3%

Anx­iety di­s­or­der
Yes, I was for­mally di­ag­nosed: 139, 9.2%
Yes, I self-di­ag­nosed: 237, 15.8%
No: 1033, 68.7%

BPD
Yes, I was for­mally di­ag­nosed: 5, 0.3%
Yes, I self-di­ag­nosed: 19, 1.3%
No: 1389, 92.4%

[Ozy says: RATIONALIST BPDERS COME BE MY FRIEND]

Schizophre­ni­a
Yes, I was for­mally di­ag­nosed: 7, 0.5%
Yes, I self-di­ag­nosed: 7, 0.5%
No: 1397, 92.9%

IV. Poli­tics, Reli­gion, Ethics

Poli­tic­s
Com­mu­nist: 9, 0.6%
Con­ser­va­tive: 67, 4.5%
Liberal: 416, 27.7%
Liber­tar­ian: 379, 25.2%
So­cial Demo­cratic: 585, 38.9%

[The big change this year was that we changed “So­cial­ist” to “So­cial Demo­cratic”. Even though the de­scrip­tion stayed the same, about eight points worth of Liber­als switched to So­cial Democrats, ap­par­ently more will­ing to ac­cept that la­bel than “So­cial­ist”. The over­all su­per­groups Liber­tar­ian vs. (Liberal, So­cial Demo­cratic) vs. Con­ser­va­tive re­main mostly un­changed.]

Poli­tics (longform)
Anar­chist: 40, 2.7%
Com­mu­nist: 9, 0.6%
Con­ser­va­tive: 23, 1.9%
Futarchist: 41, 2.7%
Left-Liber­tar­ian: 192, 12.8%
Liber­tar­ian: 164, 10.9%
Moder­ate: 56, 3.7%
Ne­o­re­ac­tionary: 29, 1.9%
So­cial Demo­crat: 162, 10.8%
So­cial­ist: 89, 5.9%

[Amus­ing poli­tics an­swers in­clude anti-in­cum­ben­tist, hav­ing-well-founded-opinions-is-hard-but-I’ve-come-to-rec­og­nize-the-prag­ma­tism-of-so­cial­ism-I-don’t-know-ask-me-again-next-year, pirate, pro­gres­sive so­cial demo­cratic en­vi­ron­men­tal liberal iso­la­tion­ist free­dom-fries lov­ing pinko com­mie piece of shit, re­pub­lic-ist aka read the fed­er­al­ist pa­pers, ro­man­tic re­con­struc­tion­ist, so­cial liberal fis­cal ag­nos­tic, tech­noutopian an­ar­choso­cial­ist (with mod­er­ate snark), what­ever it is that Scott is, and WHY ISN’T THERE AN OPTION FOR NONE SO I CAN SIGNAL MY OBVIOUS OBJECTIVITY WITH MINIMAL EFFORT. Ozy would like to point out to the au­thors of man­i­festos that no one will ac­tu­ally read their man­i­festos ex­cept zir, and they might want to con­sider post­ing them to their own blogs.]


Amer­i­can Par­ties
Demo­cratic Party: 221, 14.7%
Repub­li­can Party: 55, 3.7%
Liber­tar­ian Party: 26, 1.7%
Other party: 16, 1.1%
No party: 415, 27.6%
Non-Amer­i­cans who re­ally like click­ing but­tons: 415, 27.6%

Vot­ing

Yes: 881, 58.6%
No: 444, 29.5%
My coun­try doesn’t hold elec­tions: 5, 0.3%

Reli­gion

Athe­ist and not spiritual: 1054, 70.1%
Athe­ist and spiritual: 150, 10.0%
Ag­nos­tic: 156, 10.4%
Luke­warm the­ist: 44, 2.9%
Deist/​pan­the­ist/​etc.: 22,, 1.5%
Com­mit­ted the­ist: 60, 4.0%

Reli­gious Denom­i­na­tion
Chris­tian (Protes­tant): 53, 3.5%
Mixed/​Other: 32, 2.1%
Jewish: 31, 2.0%
Bud­dhist: 30, 2.0%
Chris­tian (Catholic): 24, 1.6%
Uni­tar­ian Univer­sal­ist or similar: 23, 1.5%

[Amus­ing de­nom­i­na­tions in­clude anti-Molochist, Ce­lestAI, cos­mic en­g­ineers, Laz­i­ness, Thelema, Res­i­mu­la­tion The­ol­ogy, and Pythagorean. The Cul­tus De­o­rum Ro­mano­rum prac­ti­tioner still needs to con­tact Ozy so they can be friends.]

Fam­ily Reli­gion
Athe­ist and not spiritual: 213, 14.2%
Athe­ist and spiritual: 74, 4.9%
Ag­nos­tic: 154. 10.2%
Luke­warm the­ist: 541, 36.0%
Deist/​Pan­the­ist/​etc.: 28, 1.9%
Com­mit­ted the­ist: 388, 25.8%

Reli­gious Back­ground
Chris­tian (Protes­tant): 580, 38.6%
Chris­tian (Catholic): 378, 25.1%
Jewish: 141, 9.4%
Chris­tian (other non-protes­tant): 88, 5.9%
Mixed/​Other: 68, 4.5%
Uni­tar­ian Univer­sal­ism or similar: 29, 1.9%
Chris­tian (Mor­mon): 28, 1.9%
Hindu: 23, 1.5%’

Mo­ral Views
Ac­cept/​lean to­wards con­se­quen­tial­ism: 901, 60.0%
Ac­cept/​lean to­wards de­on­tol­ogy: 50, 3.3%
Ac­cept/​lean to­wards nat­u­ral law: 48, 3.2%
Ac­cept/​lean to­wards virtue ethics: 150, 10.0%
Ac­cept/​lean to­wards con­trac­tu­al­ism: 79, 5.3%
Other/​no an­swer: 239, 15.9%

Meta-ethic­s
Con­struc­tivism: 474, 31.5%
Er­ror the­ory: 60, 4.0%
Non-cog­ni­tivism: 129, 8.6%
Sub­jec­tivism: 324, 21.6%
Sub­stan­tive re­al­ism: 209, 13.9%

V. Com­mu­nity Participation


Less Wrong Use
Lurker: 528, 35.1%
I’ve reg­istered an ac­count: 221, 14.7%
I’ve posted a com­ment: 419, 27.9%
I’ve posted in Dis­cus­sion: 207, 13.8%
I’ve posted in Main: 102, 6.8%

Se­quences
Never knew they ex­isted un­til this mo­ment: 106, 7.1%
Knew they ex­isted, but never looked at them: 42, 2.8%
Some, but less than 25%: 270, 18.0%
About 25%: 181, 12.0%
About 50%: 209, 13.9%
About 75%: 242, 16.1%
All or al­most all: 427, 28.4%

Mee­tup­s
Yes, reg­u­larly: 154, 10.2%
Yes, once or a few times: 325, 21.6%
No: 989, 65.8%

Com­mu­ni­ty

Yes, all the time: 112, 7.5%
Yes, some­times: 191, 12.7%
No: 1163, 77.4%

Ro­mance
Yes: 82, 5.5%
I didn’t meet them through the com­mu­nity but they’re part of the com­mu­nity now: 79, 5.3%
No: 1310, 87.2%

CFAR Events
Yes, in 2014: 45, 3.0%
Yes, in 2013: 60, 4.0%
Both: 42, 2.8%
No: 1321, 87.9%

CFAR Work­shop
Yes: 109, 7.3%
No: 1311, 87.2%

[A cou­ple per­cent more peo­ple an­swered ‘yes’ to each of mee­tups, phys­i­cal in­ter­ac­tions, CFAR at­ten­dance, and ro­mance this time around, sug­gest­ing the com­mu­nity is very very grad­u­ally be­com­ing more IRL. In par­tic­u­lar, the num­ber of peo­ple meet­ing ro­man­tic part­ners through the com­mu­nity in­creased by al­most 50% over last year.]

HPMOR
Yes: 897, 59.7%
Started but not finished: 224, 14.9%
No: 254, 16.9%

Refer­rals
Referred by a link: 464, 30.9%
HPMOR: 385, 25.6%
Been here since the Over­com­ing Bias days: 210, 14.0%
Referred by a friend: 199, 13.2%
Referred by a search en­g­ine: 114, 7.6%
Referred by other fic­tion: 17, 1.1%

[Amus­ing re­sponses in­clude “a ra­tio­nal­ist that I fol­low on Tum­blr”, “I’m a stu­dent of tribal cultish­ness”, and “It is difficult to re­call de­tails from the Be­fore Time. Things were brighter, sim­pler, as in child­hood or a dream. There has been much growth, change since then. But also loss. I can’t re­mem­ber where I found the link, is what I’m say­ing.”]

Blog Refer­rals
Slate Star Codex: 40, 2.6%
Red­dit: 25, 1.6%
Com­mon Sense Athe­ism: 21, 1.3%
Hacker News: 20, 1.3%
Gw­ern: 13, 1.0%

VI. Other Cat­e­gor­i­cal Data

Cry­on­ics Sta­tus
Don’t un­der­stand/​never thought about it: 62, 4.1%
Don’t want to: 361, 24.0%
Con­sid­er­ing it: 551, 36.7%
Haven’t got­ten around to it: 272, 18.1%
Unavailable in my area: 126, 8.4%
Yes: 64, 4.3%

Type of Global Catas­trophic Risk
As­teroid strike: 64, 4.3%
Eco­nomic/​poli­ti­cal col­lapse: 151, 10.0%
En­vi­ron­men­tal col­lapse: 218, 14.5%
Nan­otech/​grey goo: 47, 3.1%
Nu­clear war: 239, 15.8%
Pan­demic (bio­eng­ineered): 310, 20.6%
Pan­demic (nat­u­ral): 113. 7.5%
Un­friendly AI: 244, 16.2%

[Amus­ing an­swers in­clude en­nui/​eaten by In­ter­net, Friendly AI, “Greens so weaken the rich coun­tries that bar­bar­ians con­quer us”, and Tum­blr.]

Effec­tive Altru­ism (do you self-iden­tify)
Yes: 422, 28.1%
No: 758, 50.4%

[De­spite some im­pres­sive out­reach by the EA com­mu­nity, num­bers are largely the same as last year]


Effec­tive Altru­ism (do you par­ti­ci­pate in com­mu­nity)
Yes: 191, 12.7%
No: 987, 65.7%

Vege­tar­i­an
Ve­gan: 31, 2.1%
Vege­tar­ian: 114, 7.6%
Other meat re­stric­tion: 252, 16.8%
Om­nivore: 848, 56.4%

Pa­leo Diet

Yes: 33, 2.2%
Some­times: 209, 13.9%
No: 1111, 73.9%

Food Sub­sti­tutes
Most of my calories: 8. 0.5%
Some­times: 101, 6.7%
Tried: 196, 13.0%
No: 1052, 70.0%

Gen­der De­fault
I only iden­tify with my birth gen­der by de­fault: 681, 45.3%
I strongly iden­tify with my birth gen­der: 586, 39.0%

Books
<5: 198, 13.2%
5 − 10: 384, 25.5%
10 − 20: 328, 21.8%
20 − 50: 264, 17.6%
50 − 100: 105, 7.0%
> 100: 49, 3.3%

Birth Mon­th
Jan: 109, 7.3%
Feb: 90, 6.0%
Mar: 123, 8.2%
Apr: 126, 8.4%
Jun: 107, 7.1%
Jul: 109, 7.3%
Aug: 120, 8.0%
Sep: 94, 6.3%
Oct: 111, 7.4%
Nov: 102, 6.8%
Dec: 106, 7.1%

[De­spite my hope of some­thing turn­ing up here, these re­sults don’t de­vi­ate from chance]

Hand­ed­ness
Right: 1170, 77.8%
Left: 143, 9.5%
Am­bidex­trous: 37, 2.5%
Un­sure: 12, 0.8%

Pre­vi­ous Sur­veys
Yes: 757, 50.7%
No: 598, 39.8%

Fa­vorite Less Wrong Posts (all > 5 listed)
An Alien God: 11
Joy In The Merely Real: 7
Dis­solv­ing Ques­tions About Disease: 7
Poli­tics Is The Mind Killer: 6
That Alien Mes­sage: 6
A Fable Of Science And Poli­tics: 6
Belief In Belief: 5
Gen­er­al­iz­ing From One Ex­am­ple: 5
Schel­ling Fences On Slip­pery Slopes: 5
Tsuyoku Nar­i­tai: 5

VII. Numeric Data

Age: 27.67 + 8.679 (22, 26, 31) [1490]
IQ: 138.25 + 15.936 (130.25, 139, 146) [472]
SAT out of 1600: 1470.74 + 113.114 (1410, 1490, 1560) [395]
SAT out of 2400: 2210.75 + 188.94 (2140, 2250, 2320) [310]
ACT out of 36: 32.56 + 2.483 (31, 33, 35) [244]
Time in Com­mu­nity: 2010.97 + 2.174 (2010, 2011, 2013) [1317]
Time on LW: 15.73 + 95.75 (2, 5, 15) [1366]
Karma Score: 555.73 + 2181.791 (0, 0, 155) [1335]

P Many Wor­lds: 47.64 + 30.132 (20, 50, 75) [1261]
P Aliens: 71.52 + 34.364 (50, 90, 99) [1393]
P Aliens (Galaxy): 41.2 + 38.405 (2, 30, 80) [1379]
P Su­per­nat­u­ral: 6.68 + 20.271 (0, 0, 1) [1386]
P God: 8.26 + 21.088 (0, 0.01, 3) [1376]
P Reli­gion: 4.99 + 18.068 (0, 0, 0.5) [1384]
P Cry­on­ics: 22.34 + 27.274 (2, 10, 30) [1399]
P Anti-Agath­ics: 24.63 + 29.569 (1, 10, 40) [1390]
P Si­mu­la­tion 24.31 + 28.2 (1, 10, 50) [1320]
P Warm­ing 81.73 + 24.224 (80, 90, 98) [1394]
P Global Catas­trophic Risk 72.14 + 25.620 (55, 80, 90) [1394]
Sin­gu­lar­ity: 2143.44 + 356.643 (2060, 2090, 2150) [1177]

[The mean for this ques­tion is al­most en­tirely de­pen­dent on which stupid re­sponses we choose to delete as out­liers; the me­dian prac­ti­cally never changes]


Abor­tion: 4.38 + 1.032 (4, 5, 5) [1341]
Im­mi­gra­tion: 4 + 1.078 (3, 4, 5) [1310]
Taxes : 3.14 + 1.212 (2, 3, 4) [1410] (from 1 - should be lower to 5 - should be higher)
Min­i­mum Wage: 3.21 + 1.359 (2, 3, 4) [1298] (from 1 - should be lower to 5 - should be higher)
Fem­i­nism: 3.67 + 1.221 (3, 4, 5) [1332]
So­cial Jus­tice: 3.15 + 1.385 (2, 3, 4) [1309]
Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity: 2.93 + 1.201 (2, 3, 4) [1321]
Ba­sic In­come: 3.94 + 1.087 (3, 4, 5) [1314]
Great Stag­na­tion: 2.33 + .959 (2, 2, 3) [1302]
MIRI Mis­sion: 3.90 + 1.062 (3, 4, 5) [1412]
MIRI Effec­tive­ness: 3.23 + .897 (3, 3, 4) [1336]

[Re­mem­ber, all of these are ask­ing you to rate your be­lief in/​agree­ment with the con­cept on a scale of 1 (bad) to 5 (great)]

In­come: 54129.37 + 66818.904 (10,000, 30,800, 80,000) [923]
Char­ity: 1996.76 + 9492.71 (0, 100, 800) [1009]
MIRI/​CFAR: 511.61 + 5516.608 (0, 0, 0) [1011]
XRisk: 62.50 + 575.260 (0, 0, 0) [980]
Older siblings: 0.51 + .914 (0, 0, 1) [1332]
Younger siblings: 1.08 + 1.127 (0, 1, 1) [1349]
Height: 178.06 + 11.767 (173, 179, 184) [1236]
Hours On­line: 43.44 + 25.452 (25, 40, 60) [1221]
Bem Sex Role Mas­culinity: 42.54 + 9.670 (36, 42, 49) [1032]
Bem Sex Role Fem­i­ninity: 42.68 + 9.754 (36, 43, 50) [1031]
Right Hand: .97 + 0.67 (.94, .97, 1.00)
Left Hand: .97 + .048 (.94, .97, 1.00)

VIII. Fish­ing Expeditions

[cor­re­la­tions, in de­scend­ing or­der]

SAT Scores out of 1600/​SAT Scores out of 2400 .844 (59)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​P God .697 (1365)
Fem­i­nism/​So­cial Jus­tice .671 (1299)
P God/​P Reli­gion .669 (1367)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​P Reli­gion .631 (1372)
Char­ity Dona­tions/​MIRI and CFAR Dona­tions .619 (985)
P Aliens/​P Aliens 2 .607 (1376)
Taxes/​Min­i­mum Wage .587 (1287)
SAT Score out of 2400/​ACT Score .575 (89)
Age/​Num­ber of Chil­dren .506 (1480)
P Cry­on­ics/​P Anti-Agath­ics .484 (1385)
SAT Score out of 1600/​ACT Score .480 (81)
Min­i­mum Wage/​So­cial Jus­tice .456 (1267)
Taxes/​So­cial Jus­tice .427 (1281)
Taxes/​Fem­i­nism .414 (1299)
MIRI Mis­sion/​MIRI Effec­tive­ness .395 (1331)
P Warm­ing/​Taxes .385 (1261)
Taxes/​Ba­sic In­come .383 (1285)
Min­i­mum Wage/​Fem­i­nism .378 (1286)
P God/​Abor­tion -.378 (1266)
Im­mi­gra­tion/​Fem­i­nism .365 (1296)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​Abor­tion -.362 (1276)
Fem­i­nism/​Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity -.360 (1306)
MIRI and CFAR Dona­tions/​Other XRisk Char­ity Dona­tions .345 (973)
So­cial Jus­tice/​Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity -.341 (1288)
P Reli­gion/​Abor­tion -.326 (1275)
P Warm­ing/​Min­i­mum Wage .324 (1248)
Min­i­mum Wage/​Ba­sic In­come .312 (1276)
P Warm­ing/​Ba­sic In­come .306 (1260)
Im­mi­gra­tion/​So­cial Jus­tice .294 (1278)
P Anti-Agath­ics/​MIRI Mis­sion .293 (1351)
P Warm­ing/​Fem­i­nism .285 (1281)
P Many Wor­lds/​P Anti-Agath­ics .276 (1245)
So­cial Jus­tice/​Fem­i­ninity .267 (990)
Min­i­mum Wage/​Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity -.264 (1274)
Im­mi­gra­tion/​Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity -.263 (1286)
P Many Wor­lds/​MIRI Mis­sion .263 (1233)
P Aliens/​P Warm­ing .262 (1365)
P Warm­ing/​So­cial Jus­tice .257 (1262)
Taxes/​Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity -.252 (1291)
So­cial Jus­tice/​Ba­sic In­come .251 (1281)
Fem­i­nism/​Fem­i­ninity .250 (1003)
Older Siblings/​Younger Siblings -.243 (1321)
Char­ity Dona­tions/​Other XRisk Char­ity Dona­tions .240 (957
P Anti-Agath­ics/​P Si­mu­la­tion .238 (1312)
Abor­tion/​Min­i­mum Wage .229 (1293)
Fem­i­nism/​Ba­sic In­come .227 (1297)
Abor­tion/​Fem­i­nism .226 (1321)
P Cry­on­ics/​MIRI Mis­sion .223 (1360)
Im­mi­gra­tion/​Ba­sic In­come .208 (1279)
P Many Wor­lds/​P Cry­on­ics .202 (1251)
Num­ber of Cur­rent Part­ners/​Fem­i­ninity: .202 (1029)
P Warm­ing/​Im­mi­gra­tion .202 (1260)
P Warm­ing/​Abor­tion .201 (1289)
Abor­tion/​Taxes .198 (1304)
Age/​P Si­mu­la­tion .197 (1313)
Poli­ti­cal In­ter­est/​Mas­culinity .194 (1011)
P Cry­on­ics/​MIRI Effec­tive­ness .191 (1285)
Abor­tion/​So­cial Jus­tice .191 (1301)
P Si­mu­la­tion/​MIRI Mis­sion .188 (1290)
P Many Wor­lds/​P Warm­ing .188 (1240)
Age/​Num­ber of Cur­rent Part­ners .184 (1480)
P Anti-Agath­ics/​MIRI Effec­tive­ness .183 (1277)
P Many Wor­lds/​P Si­mu­la­tion .181 (1211)
Abor­tion/​Im­mi­gra­tion .181 (1304)
Num­ber of Cur­rent Part­ners/​Num­ber of Chil­dren .180 (1484)
P Cry­on­ics/​P Si­mu­la­tion .174 (1315)
P Global Catas­trophic Risk/​MIRI Mis­sion -.174 (1359)
Min­i­mum Wage/​Fem­i­ninity .171 (981)
Abor­tion/​Ba­sic In­come .170 (1302)
Age/​P Cry­on­ics -.165 (1391)
Im­mi­gra­tion/​Taxes .165 (1293)
P Warm­ing/​Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity -.163 (1271)
P Aliens 2/​Warm­ing .160 (1353)
Abor­tion/​Younger Siblings -.155 (1292)
P Reli­gion/​Med­i­tate .155 (1189)
Fem­i­nism/​Mas­culinity -.155 (1004)
Im­mi­gra­tion/​Fem­i­ninity .155 (988)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​Ba­sic In­come -.153 (1246)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​P Warm­ing -.152 (1361)
Num­ber of Cur­rent Part­ners/​Karma Score .152 (1332)
P Many Wor­lds/​MIRI Effec­tive­ness .152 (1181)
Age/​MIRI Mis­sion -.150 (1404)
P Reli­gion/​P Warm­ing -.150 (1358)
P Reli­gion/​Ba­sic In­come -.146 (1245)
P God/​Ba­sic In­come -.146 (1237)
Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity/​Fem­i­ninity -.145 (999)
P God/​P Warm­ing -.144 (1351)
Taxes/​Fem­i­ninity .142 (987)
Num­ber of Chil­dren/​Younger Siblings .138 (1343)
Num­ber of Cur­rent Part­ners/​Mas­culinity: .137 (1030)
P Many Wor­lds/​P God -.137 (1232)
Age/​Char­ity Dona­tions .133 (1002)
P Anti-Agath­ics/​P Global Catas­trophic Risk -.132 (1373)
P Warm­ing/​Mas­culinity -.132 (992)
P Global Catas­trophic Risk/​MIRI and CFAR Dona­tions -.132 (982)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​Sin­gu­lar­ity .131 (1148)
God/​Taxes -.130 (1240)
Age/​P Anti-Agath­ics -.128 (1382)
P Aliens/​Taxes .127(1258)
Fem­i­nism/​Great Stag­na­tion -.127 (1287)
P Many Wor­lds/​P Su­per­nat­u­ral -.127 (1241)
P Aliens/​Abor­tion .126 (1284)
P Anti-Agath­ics/​Great Stag­na­tion -.126 (1248)
P Anti-Agath­ics/​P Warm­ing .125 (1370)
Age/​P Aliens .124 (1386)
P Aliens/​Min­i­mum Wage .124 (1245)
P Aliens/​P Global Catas­trophic Risk .122 (1363)
Age/​MIRI Effec­tive­ness -.122 (1328)
Age/​P Su­per­nat­u­ral .120 (1370)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​MIRI Mis­sion -.119 (1345)
P Many Wor­lds/​P Reli­gion -.119 (1238)
P Reli­gion/​MIRI Mis­sion -.118 (1344)
Poli­ti­cal In­ter­est/​So­cial Jus­tice .118 (1304)
P Anti-Agath­ics/​MIRI and CFAR Dona­tions .118 (976)
Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity/​Ba­sic In­come -.115 (1262)
P Many Wor­lds/​Abor­tion .115 (1166)
Age/​Karma Score .114 (1327)
P Aliens/​Fem­i­nism .114 (1277)
P Many Wor­lds/​P Global Catas­trophic Risk -.114 (1243)
Poli­ti­cal In­ter­est/​Fem­i­ninity .113 (1010)
Num­ber of Chil­dren/​P Si­mu­la­tion -.112 (1317)
P Reli­gion/​Younger Siblings .112 (1275)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​Taxes -.112 (1248)
Age/​Mas­culinity .112 (1027)
Poli­ti­cal In­ter­est/​Taxes .111 (1305)
P God/​P Si­mu­la­tion .110 (1296)
P Many Wor­lds/​Ba­sic In­come .110 (1139)
P Su­per­nat­u­ral/​Younger Siblings .109 (1274)
P Si­mu­la­tion/​Ba­sic In­come .109 (1195)
Age/​P Aliens 2 .107 (1371)
MIRI Mis­sion/​Ba­sic In­come .107 (1279)
Age/​Great Stag­na­tion .107 (1295)
P Many Wor­lds/​P Aliens .107 (1253)
Num­ber of Cur­rent Part­ners/​So­cial Jus­tice .106 (1304)
Hu­man Bio­di­ver­sity/​Great Stag­na­tion .105 (1285)
Num­ber of Chil­dren/​Abor­tion -.104 (1337)
Num­ber of Cur­rent Part­ners/​P Cry­on­ics -.102 (1396)
MIRI Mis­sion/​Abor­tion .102 (1305)
Im­mi­gra­tion/​Great Stag­na­tion -.101 (1269)
Age/​Poli­ti­cal In­ter­est .100 (1339)
P Global Catas­trophic Risk/​Poli­ti­cal In­ter­est .099 (1295)
P Aliens/​P Reli­gion -.099 (1357)
P God/​MIRI Mis­sion -.098 (1335)
P Aliens/​P Si­mu­la­tion .098 (1308)
Num­ber of Cur­rent Part­ners/​Im­mi­gra­tion .098 (1305)
P God/​Poli­ti­cal In­ter­est .098 (1274)
P Warm­ing/​P Global Catas­trophic Risk .096 (1377)

In ad­di­tion to the Left/​Right fac­tor we had last year, this data seems to me to have an Agrees with the Se­quences Fac­tor—the same peo­ple tend to be­lieve in many-wor­lds, cryo, athe­ism, simu­la­tion­ism, MIRI’s mis­sion and effec­tive­ness, anti-agath­ics, etc. Weirdly, be­lief in global catas­trophic risk is nega­tively cor­re­lated with most of the Agrees with Se­quences things. Some­one who ac­tu­ally knows how to do statis­tics should run a fac­tor anal­y­sis on this data.

IX. Digit Ratios

After san­i­tiz­ing the digit ra­tio num­bers, the fol­low­ing cor­re­la­tions came up:

Digit ra­tio R hand was cor­re­lated with mas­culinity at a level of −0.180 p < 0.01
Digit ra­tio L hand was cor­re­lated with mas­culinity at a level of −0.181 p < 0.01
Digit ra­tio R hand was slightly cor­re­lated with fem­i­ninity at a level of +0.116 p < 0.05

Holy #@!$ the fem­i­nism thing ACTUALLY HELD UP. There is a 0.144 cor­re­la­tion be­tween right-handed digit ra­tio and fem­i­nism, p < 0.01. And an 0.112 cor­re­la­tion be­tween left-handed digit ra­tio and fem­i­nism, p < 0.05.

The only other poli­ti­cal po­si­tion that cor­re­lates with digit ra­tio is im­mi­gra­tion. There is a 0.138 cor­re­la­tion be­tween left-handed digit ra­tio and be­lieve in open bor­ders p < 0.01, and an 0.111 cor­re­la­tion be­tween right-handed digit ra­tio and be­lief in open bor­ders, p < 0.05.

No digit cor­re­la­tion with abor­tion, taxes, min­i­mum wage, so­cial jus­tice, hu­man bio­di­ver­sity, ba­sic in­come, or great stag­na­tion.

Okay, need to rule out that this is all con­founded by gen­der. I ran a few analy­ses on men and women sep­a­rately.

On men alone, the con­nec­tion to mas­culinity holds up. Restrict­ing sam­ple size to men, left-handed digit ra­tio cor­re­sponds to mas­culinity with at −0.157, p < 0.01. Left handed at −0.134, p < 0.05. Right-handed cor­re­lates with fem­i­ninity at 0.120, p < 0.05. The fem­i­nism cor­re­la­tion holds up. Restrict­ing sam­ple size to men, right-handed digit ra­tio cor­re­lates with fem­i­nism at a level of 0.149, p < 0.01. Left handed just barely fails to cor­re­late. Both right and left cor­re­late with im­mi­gra­tion at 0.135, p < 0.05.

On women alone, the Bem mas­culinity cor­re­la­tion is the high­est cor­re­la­tion we’re go­ing to get in this en­tire study. Right hand is −0.433, p < 0.01. Left hand is −0.299, p < 0.05. Fem­i­ninity trends to­ward sig­nifi­cance but doesn’t get there. The fem­i­nism cor­re­la­tion trends to­ward sig­nifi­cance but doesn’t get there. In gen­eral there was too small a sam­ple size of women to pick up any­thing but the most whop­ping effects.

Since digit ra­tio is re­lated to testos­terone and testos­terone some­times af­fects risk-tak­ing, I won­dered if it would cor­re­late with any of the cal­ibra­tion an­swers. I se­lected peo­ple who had an­swered Cal­ibra­tion Ques­tion 5 in­cor­rectly and ran an anal­y­sis to see if digit ra­tio was cor­re­lated with ten­dency to be more con­fi­dent in the in­cor­rect an­swer. No effect was found.

Other things that didn’t cor­re­late with digit ra­tio: IQ, SAT, num­ber of cur­rent part­ners, ten­dency to work in math­e­mat­i­cal pro­fes­sions.

...I still can’t be­lieve this ac­tu­ally worked. The finger-length/​fem­i­nism con­nec­tion ACTUALLY WORKED. What a world. What a world. Some­one may want to dou­ble-check these re­sults be­fore I get too ex­cited.

X. Calibration


There were ten cal­ibra­tion ques­tions on this year’s sur­vey. Along with an­swers, they were:

1. What is the largest bone in the body? Fe­mur
2. What state was Pres­i­dent Obama born in? Hawaii
3. Off the coast of what coun­try was the bat­tle of Trafal­gar fought? Spain
4. What Norse God was called the All-Father? Odin
5. Who won the 1936 No­bel Prize for his work in quan­tum physics? Heisen­berg
6. Which planet has the high­est den­sity? Earth
7. Which Bible char­ac­ter was mar­ried to Rachel and Leah? Ja­cob
8. What or­ganelle is called “the pow­er­house of the cell”? Mi­to­chon­dria
9. What coun­try has the fourth-high­est pop­u­la­tion? In­done­sia
10. What is the best-sel­l­ing com­puter game? Minecraft

I ran cal­ibra­tion scores for ev­ery­body based on how well they did on the ten cal­ibra­tion ques­tions. Th­ese failed to cor­re­late with IQ, SAT, LW karma, or any of the things you might ex­pect to be mea­sures of ei­ther in­tel­li­gence or pre­vi­ous train­ing in cal­ibra­tion; they didn’t differ by gen­der, cor­re­lates of com­mu­nity mem­ber­ship, or any men­tal ill­ness [deleted sec­tion about cor­re­lat­ing with MWI and MIRI, this was an ar­ti­fact].

Your an­swers looked like this:



The red line rep­re­sents perfect cal­ibra­tion. Where an­swers dip be­low the line, it means you were over­con­fi­dent; when they go above, it means you were un­der­con­fi­dent.

It looks to me like ev­ery­one was hor­ren­dously un­der­con­fi­dent on all the easy ques­tions, and hor­ren­dously over­con­fi­dent on all the hard ques­tions. To give an ex­am­ple of how hor­ren­dous, peo­ple who were 50% sure of their an­swers to ques­tion 10 got it right only 13% of the time; peo­ple who were 100% sure only got it right 44% of the time. Ob­vi­ously those num­bers should be 50% and 100% re­spec­tively.

This builds upon re­sults from pre­vi­ous sur­veys in which your cal­ibra­tion was also hor­rible. This is not a hu­man uni­ver­sal—peo­ple who put even a small amount of train­ing into cal­ibra­tion can be­come very well cal­ibrated very quickly. This is a sign that most Less Wrongers con­tinue to ne­glect the very ba­sics of ra­tio­nal­ity and are in­ca­pable of judg­ing how much ev­i­dence they have on a given is­sue. Veter­ans of the site do no bet­ter than new­bies on this mea­sure.

XI. Wrap­ping Up

To show my ap­pre­ci­a­tion for ev­ery­one com­plet­ing this sur­vey, in­clud­ing the ar­du­ous digit ra­tio mea­sure­ments, I have ran­domly cho­sen a per­son to re­ceive a $30 mon­e­tary prize. That per­son is...the per­son us­ing the pub­lic key “The World Is Quiet Here”. If that per­son tells me their pri­vate key, I will give them $30.

I have re­moved 73 peo­ple who wished to re­main pri­vate, deleted the Pri­vate Keys, and san­i­tized a very small amount of data. Aside from that, here are the raw sur­vey re­sults for your view­ing and an­a­lyz­ing plea­sure:

(as Ex­cel)

(as SPSS)

(as CSV)