Psychologists do not know the theory of probability

Probability specialists have discovered fundamental flaws in many sociological surveys and psychological tests that have been carried out over the past 50 years.

The fact is that the humanities absolutely do not understand mathematics. In particular, they don’t know Monty Hall’s paradox . This is not surprising, because this phenomenon from the theory of probability is contrary to common sense. And people of humanitarian specialties (sociologists, psychologists, etc.) conduct their surveys and calculate the results based on common sense and basic logic, which does not work here.

Here is a simple example of cognitive dissonance. On the game "Oh lucky!" You are offered three options for the correct answer. You have chosen one, but the good host decides to help you and closes one of the three answers, which is definitely wrong. What should be done in this situation? Common sense suggests that there is no reason to cancel your choice. But probability theory clearly indicates that if you change the answer option, your chances of winning double .
')
This is an approximate description of the famous Monty Hall paradox (a detailed description under the habrakat). If we take it into account when conducting opinion polls and psychological studies, then the results of many of them can be interpreted differently and the results vary slightly.

Help from Wikipedia .

“The Monty Hall paradox is one of the known problems of probability theory, the solution of which, at first glance, is contrary to common sense. The task is formulated as a description of a hypothetical game based on the American television show "Let's Make a Deal", and is named after the host of this show. The most common formulation of this problem, published in 1990 in Parade Magazine, is as follows:

Imagine that you become a member of a game in which you need to choose one of three doors. Behind one of the doors is a car, behind two other doors - a goat. You choose one of the doors, for example, number 1, then the presenter, who knows where the car is and where the goats open, opens one of the remaining doors, for example, number 3, behind which there is a goat. After that, he asks you if you would like to change your choice and choose door number 2. Will your chances of winning a car increase if you accept the offer of the presenter and change your choice?

Although this formulation of the problem is the most well-known, it is somewhat problematic, since it leaves some important task conditions uncertain. Below is a more complete wording.

When solving this problem, it is usually argued like this: after the presenter has opened the door, behind which there is a goat, the car can only be behind one of the two remaining doors. Since the player cannot get any additional information about which door is behind the car, the probability of finding the car behind each of the doors is the same, and changing the initial door selection does not give the player any advantage. However, this line of reasoning is incorrect. If the presenter always knows which door is behind, always opens the goat behind the door, and always invites the player to change his choice, then the probability that the car is behind the door chosen by the player is 1/3, and accordingly, the probability that the car is located behind the remaining door is 2/3. Thus, changing the initial choice increases the chances of a player winning a car by 2 times. This conclusion contradicts the intuitive perception of the situation by the majority of people, therefore the described task is called the Monty Hall paradox. ”