Probability of Decisiveness

In the latest twist to the controversy surrounding television quiz shows that use
premium-rate phone calls, ITV Play has been permanently retired, (and to have even less sympathy for this channel - if that's possible - take a look at some launch party photos).

I feel sympathetic towards the many people who have wasted their money participating in such shows, because they're being conned. I'm not talking about the examples of outright fraud, but connec by innacurate information about basic probability. The expected gain from such a quiz is the prize multiplied by the probability that you win. The shows highlight and underline the prize, but are silent regarding the probability. It encourages us to think only about what would happen if we win, rather than what the likely outcome is.

But notice the hypocrasy of those who lament crass television, yet participate in exactly the same charade when it comes to democracy. People who phone into television quizzes are simply doing what  politicians and the establishment are telling them to do: Vote or Die!

The reason I'm indifferent about quiz shows, and indifferent about voting, is because I know my vote/call is highly unlikely to make a difference. As Bryan Caplan shows, the probabilty of deciciveness in an election is:

 

For example, evidently my local MP is a Tory called James Clappison. Last election he got 22,665 votes; Kelly Tabb (Labour) got 11,572; Jonathan Davies (Lib Dem) got 7,817; and Jim Dry (Socialist Labour) got 518 (from BBC). Based on these figures, the probability that eveyone else votes "for" the incumbant is 53.2%, and the total votes cast were 42,572. With p=0.532 and n=42,525...

the probability of deciciveness = 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000004318

It's ironic how politicians claim to "protect" citizens against such behaviour, and are responsible for propogating the cognitive error themselves. In fact, they're no different at all to the "Good Summa" presenters who tempt us into voting purely for their own marginal gains.  Ignore the lot of them!

Comments

[Andrew Mellor]

Surely the two main differences are firstly cost (it's free to vote in an election) and secondly the theoretical beneficiary: no-one benefits from you voting in an election except for the you the individual and possibly the person you are voting for (though, this is a little more complex given your explanation above). In TV quizzes, there is no aspiration involved, no noble democratic theory (however troubled) at work. And the lies are the essential core of the operation rather than an unfortunate side-effect of it (as in politics).

[AJE]

It's costly to vote: not just in the physical and opportunity cost of getting to the polling station but also the investment made in researching candidates and being aware of political issues. You also avoid the costs associated with having to stomach Today(!)

[Matthew Whitfield]

Oh my God - how EVIL can these politicians get? Reinforcing a cultural civic norm by encouraging us to vote, getting us to think about voting (do we really think about this - don't we just instinctively know who we hate and who we hate a little less?) and traipse out in potentially bad weather to put a cross in a box - it's like they've made us their slaves in a world of corrupt priviledge that we're too blind to see!

Betting in any competition will have fixed odds depending on the rules that have been set and the number of participants etc. Voting is not betting - there are potential outcomes that cannot be predicted by any formula. I laugh in the face of a formula that assumes that probability can be accurately determined in a dynamic situation such as voting intentions. Your figure has been reached by using data from the last election - before the last election you would have had no idea what the spread of voting would be.

I am up for this debate - I vote and do so rationally. Tell me why you think I'm wrong to do so.

[AJE]

I don't think you're wrong to do so. What makes you think that?

[Matthew Whitfield]

I'm glad you don't think I'm wrong to vote. Your original piece suggests that you do think we're irrational to do so. Is this the case?

[AJE]

No, all i'm saying is that it strikes me as being hypocritical to say that "TV quizzes misguide/exploit people regarding the chances of them winning" and "your vote makes a difference/counts".

I tried to explain why i'm apathetic to both, but that doesn't mean we all should be. Presumeably you gain pleasure from voting in a way that I don't. I'm sure some people get pleasure from participating in TV quizzes in a way that I don't. Tastes are subjective, after all.

[Cheap Jordan 1]

Thanks for sharing. This website is to I too have to help. Very good.

[402300572]

http://www.coachfactoryoutletstoreonlinez.net