But as I understand it, it doesn't: In the graph generated using random data, the lines intersect in the middle (bias_lowskill == bias_highskill), whereas in DK's paper they intersect in the upper right (so bias_lowskill != bias_highskill).
But as I understand it, it doesn't: In the graph generated using random data, the lines intersect in the middle (bias_lowskill == bias_highskill), whereas in DK's paper they intersect in the upper right (so bias_lowskill != bias_highskill).
That's going to skew the data somewhat because people don't work that way. While you will likely have some zeros, I wouldn't expect any from the skilled population and I'd expect fewer from the rest of the population.
That's going to make the "difference in estimation" line higher overall, which would make it intersect higher and more to the right.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31038386
[2] http://emilkirkegaard.dk/understanding_statistics/?app=Dunni...
I see what you mean, but is using the "general overestimation" slider actually unbiased? I don't really understand what it is supposed to represent. Looking at the code, it seems to be only an additive term that shifts the plot upwards, but that does not explain anything (actually, in the code, the variable is called "up_bias", and could correspond to an actual DK effect...).