Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not gonna lie - i'd choose 6 points, and hope that the rest of the people picked 2 points because they were afraid to be the "over 10%" 6 point pick.
I figure i'd have nothing to lose - it's not like the professor is going to DEDUCT 6 points.
Yup.
In fact I would choose 6 points, spend more time on the real test, and NOT bother with the extra credit question!
I would have answered 6, just to sabotage the greedy folks who let everyone else take the lower number. In this situation, no one needs extra credit, if they wanted a good grade they could have studied more.
LOL. Now that's funny. It makes perfect sense in a passive aggressive way. You don't need the credit either way, so do your best to make sure no one else gets 2 points OR 6 points. As someone else said, I was one of the students who blew the curve and made the other students angry. And since I was a Psychology major, I definitely wouldn't have needed even 2 extra points. I guess I have mellowed out in my old age. My current answer, to choose 2 points, may not have been the same as when I graduated in 1997. I probably would have thought much the same as you back then, Eazine. I also agree with some people's philosophy on extra credit. Students should take responsibility and just do what they're supposed to do anyway; show up at class and study. Why get credit they don't deserve?
I'd choose 2 or leave it blank. I probably wouldn't need the extra credit so why would I screw it up for other people who might need it? True, they could have studied more but we've all had tests where we just didn't have enough time to study (work, family problems...) or just had a bad day.
Generally, because I'm usually a very good student, I'd opt for the sure 2 points rather than the possible 6 points because while the two points might be nice, I usually wouldn't need them, let alone the 6 points. So why not go for the guaranteed bonus if I wasn't desperate for the 6 points?
That's my initial thinking as well, but then there is a chance that up to 10% of the class will get 6 points and so the "worse" students get 4 more points, which hurts you.
Given that, I'd say try for 6, because if you are a "good" student that doesn't need the points, then 6 for you + 10% of the class, 2 for the rest or 0 for all is fine.
I would have left it blank. I believe that if someone is to get any "extra credit" it should be earned. I got good grades anyway, so wouldn't have needed extra credit. But if I ever did go for extra credit, it was by actually doing something extra to earn it. I pretty much felt this was in college and still so, 20+ years later.
I'd pick the 2 so there would be a better chance of getting the 2 as I most likely wouldn't need it, myself. I usually test very well and wouldn't need the 6, so why deny the 2?
I agree though, that you should have to do something for the extra points. I kept looking for some requirement and it felt weird that the points were just gifted for no reason.
I'd pick the 2 so there would be a better chance of getting the 2 as I most likely wouldn't need it, myself. I usually test very well and wouldn't need the 6, so why deny the 2?
I agree though, that you should have to do something for the extra points. I kept looking for some requirement and it felt weird that the points were just gifted for no reason.
Actually, the points weren't gifted for no reason. Because it was a Psychology class, the "extra credit" was actually an experiment. Psychological experiments are often done on college students, because there is a wide pool of able bodied adults readily available and who can consent for such studies. Plus the researcher can usually get away with paying them little or no money for their participation. (Beer and pizza goes a long way on a college campus). The experiment was a simple study in anonymous self centeredness vs. anonymous cooperation. "Am I going to act in my own self interest or do what's best for the group?"
I would have left it blank. I believe that if someone is to get any "extra credit" it should be earned. I got good grades anyway, so wouldn't have needed extra credit. But if I ever did go for extra credit, it was by actually doing something extra to earn it. I pretty much felt this was in college and still so, 20+ years later.
Idk, I got extra credit on an exam in a sociology of the family class in undergrad. The professor asked the question of "What appointment am I going to after this class" . Since I didn't need the points and it was a weird question I went with my gut based on what I'd seen over the course and I wrote that I thought he was headed to a divorce attorney. But that I'd much rather be wrong than get any bonus points.
I was right and I've never felt so bad about getting an extra credit question right in my whole life.
As for this class, the question isn't about extra credit, the one class that got it "right" was a statical fluke. Since it's a psychology class the question makes sense. It's not about the answer, it's about the problem.
Right, but the OP's questions is "how would you answer this question?" I took that to mean if I were a student who was given that question at the end of a test. From the observer's point of view, yes, it's a valid psychological study. But leave that all aside, and really think how you would answer it if you had no idea that it was an experimental question.
...And I would say that you DID earn your extra credit in the above example. You must have put 2 and 2 together somehow, and with your reasoning ability, you were correct in answering the question. There were an infinite number of possible answers. That was a pretty damned good guess.
This is a game theory problem--it's not new. It's a variation on the classic "Prisoner's Dilemma":
Two co-conspirators, A & B, are arrested. They are held in separate cells, with no way to communicate with one another. The police already have enough evidence to send both to jail for a year, but they're hoping for evidence of a more serious crime. They offer both prisoners a deal if they will squeal on their partner--known as defecting in game theory. The partners both know that
If both A and B STAY SILENT, they will each serve the 1 year in jail.
If both A and B DEFECT, they will each serve 2 years in prison.
If one partner defects and the other stays silent, the defector will go FREE and the one who keeps faith will serve 3 years in prison.
What should Prisoner A do?
In the Prisoner's Dilemma, unless you care more about your partner's freedom than your own, the optimal choice is to defect--if your partner defects, you should also defect so that you only serve 2 years, not 3, and if your partner stays silent you should still defect, so that you serve 0 years instead of 1.
The twist in the psych test is that there is no penalty for altruism, other than maintaining the status quo and knowing that a few of your classmates got away with something. If you defect (choose 6 points), it is either because you are gambling that most of your classmates will be more altruistic than you or because you just can't stand the thought of anyone getting a bigger advantage than you, as some here have admitted.
A really interesting thing about these game theory scenarios is that the math often changes if there's more than one round--if you are going to have to face the same thing again with the same person/people, then their knowledge of how trustworthy you are becomes a factor, and often starting out altruistically works best (though not being a doormat for a player who you know will defect). You can see this play out in real life socialization: folks who are socialized in a very close-knit society where everyone can find out about and remember your actions come to value altruism more highly. It's the mathematics behind the stereotype of the trusting, gullible yokel vs. the stab-you-in-the-back city slicker.
This also reminds me of the "Split or Steal" portion of the British game show Golden Balls. Radiolab did a great feature on this game theory game that delves into the mathematics and psychology of it all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
