

Which Words Matter the Most - ankitoberoi
http://www.adpushup.com/blog/psychology-writing-online-words-matter/

======
swombat
Worth reading through to the end of the article, rather than just the point
about Program A and B... a surprisingly good article. I use a lot of the
techniques in there in my blogging, and have done for years... they're pretty
much unconscious for me by now.

------
vorg
> A typical example of this is the sentence ‘place the box on the table by the
> window in the bedroom’. This sentence can be interpreted in three different
> ways:

* Pick up the box from the table, which is standing next to the window and put it in the bedroom.

* Pick up the box from the table and put it next to the window in the bedroom.

* Pick up the box and put it on the table that is standing next to the window in the bedroom.

Only in writing. When speaking, we'd use different intonation. We'd stress the
capitalized words:

* place the box on the table by the window in the BEDROOM

* place the box on the table by the WINDOW in the bedroom

* place the box on the TABLE by the window in the bedroom

------
webmaven
I wonder what choice people would make if both programs were described with
complete information on both positive and negative consequences.

------
infinity0
In both cases, Program A is NOT equivalent to Program B. Program A is missing
the vital information that there are 60,000 people in total.

~~~
gabemart
It's implied that the participants were told in advance there were 60,000
total predicted fatalities.

Regardless, the programs are not equivalent.

    
    
       A: 100% chance of 20,000 saved, 100% chance of 40,000 dead
       B: 33% chance of 60,000 saved, 66% chance of 60,000 dead
    

If we allow 33% to equal 1/3 and 66% to equal 2/3, we can see that the
expected value of the options is the same, but that does not mean the options
are equally attractive. In gambling terms, the variance [0] of B is much
greater than that of A. Which option is more attractive depends on the risk
appetite of the chooser, which in turn should depend on their circumstances.

If, for example, there has been a great catastrophe and there are only 60,000
people left alive on Earth, and the government has to choose which option to
pick with the goal of ensuring the survival of the human race, A is far more
attractive, because it minimizes or eliminates (to borrow from gambling
terminology again) the risk of ruin [1].

If, on the other hand, the 60,000 predicted fatalities constitute the standing
army of a small country that is under threat of invasion and is protected only
by the size of its military, B may be preferable, as a chance at preserving
the entire army may be more attractive than the certainty of reducing it in
size by 2/3 and being vulnerable to invasion.

But this is all a little off-topic, as I don't believe options A and B were
ever meant to be equivalent. The point is options A1 and A2 are equivalent,
yet the change in wording between then leads to people choosing A1 over B1 yet
B2 over A2.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_of_ruin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_of_ruin)

~~~
Dylan16807
When infinity0 says 'equivalent' they are talking about the scenario in which
the choice is made. A and B have to have the same preconditions or the choice
is meaningless. Not that A and B have the same results, which is blatantly
false.

~~~
infinity0
Exactly. The participants were given extra information that are subsequently
NOT given within the statement of each "Program". gabemart's point about the
probabilities is correct, but it's a much minor one compared to the _omission
of information_ from the statements.

