Here's the news article on this: http://www.yourmorals.org/blog/2011/11/how-to-use-groups-at-yourmorals-org/
And here's the group that the LW community just created: http://www.yourmorals.org/setgraphgroup.php?grp=623d5410f705f6a1f92c83565a3cfffc
I think it will be very interesting to see what we can all get on this.
For the record, users under 18 cannot participate.
Edit: Unless, of course, you have no morals and decide to lie about your age as I did.
The "political belief-bias" version of the "reasoning styles study " is awesome, precisely because how mind-killing it can be for people. I'd have it a LW norm that people always have to disclose their score when commenting on such issues. Though I might not be the best man to promote such a norm since I do admit I was pleased on getting a perfect score on resistance to both "liberal" and "conservative" belief bias.
To bad the we can't pick and do the other versions of the test after we solve the one we got assigned.
Spoilers:: V jnf nyfb unccl jvgu YrffJebatre'f vzcerffvir erfvfgnapr gb pbafreingvir oryvrs ovnf, ohg dhvgr qvfnccbvagrq jvgu vgf snvyher ba yvoreny oryvrs ovnf. Sbe Onlrf fnxr jr jurer oneyrl orggre guna "yvorenyf" naq tbg fbhaqyl orngra ol "pbafreingvirf"! Gur A ng gur gvzr V ynfg ybbxrq ng guvf erfhyg jnf 11, vs V nz ernqvat gur erfhygf evtug, juvpu vfa'g zhpu, jr'yy frr vs gur erfhyg punatrf nf zber YJref gnxr vg.
I'm accordingly updating my probabilities of how reliable LW is on certain implicitly ideological issues.
Wow, neat! If we had more LWers solve at least a few of these, we'd get lots of interesting data. This thread should be up voted more!
This is pretty cool. I think I may have just messed up our data on the Sacredness study, though. Rot13'd for potentially biasing other people's answers: VVEP, gur pbfg bs fnivat n uhzna yvsr guebhtu bcgvzny cuvynaguebcl vf yrff guna gra gubhfnaq qbyynef, naq abar bs gur guvatf V jnf orvat nfxrq gb qb jrer jbegu abg fnivat n uhzna yvsr. Fb V arire tnir n ahzore terngre guna gra gubhfnaq qbyynef.
To see a list of all the quizzes, see http://www.yourmorals.org/all_morality_values_quizzes.php
Haha - this is interesting: http://www.yourmorals.org/bigfive_process.php - for some reason - us LWers are less conscientiousness than others. I wonder why (or actually, I just noticed a sample size of 3 - I wonder if this will stand with more samples).
http://www.yourmorals.org/schwartz_process.php - love it how we all score 0 on traditionalism
http://www.yourmorals.org/5f_new2_process.php - we're lower than everyone on all counts
Hmm, I took the "sacredness" study, and got high scores for one of the categories (which shall remain unnamed due to spoilers), indicating that I care strongly about this category. However, I believe my high score is biased due to the way the questions for that category were phrased: they conflated that category with another one which I value quite highly.
Did anyone else have that (perceived) experience, or is it just me ? I could post some rot13ed details, if people think the above paragraph is too vague.
You're saying that you took an online survey with multiple choice answers to vague hypotheticals and the result doesn't fully capture your ethics, beliefs, and values?
Apparently, we mostly think practically everything is always OK. http://www.yourmorals.org/rel_norms_process.php
Your second link just goes to the Your Morals frontpage, even when I'm logged in.
EDIT: If you're already a member, http://www.yourmorals.org/setgraphgroup.php?grp=623d5410f705f6a1f92c83565a3cfffc should work. (I had to register a new account to see this, however.)
If anyone is curious, I put up most of my results at
I just joined the group; I wish a N was given when the average lesswrong opinion is shown on an issue.
If I'm reading things correctly, it is. It's at the top of the graph images. For example "(Blue=23664 Liberals, Red=4489 Conservatives, Grey=18 Less Wrong)".
@InquilineKea: I wonder if putting [Poll] before this title would have been appropriate. It does seem to capture a lot of attention and this I think this thread could really use it since it would be a neat source of data for the community.
In the sacredness study, the condition "assume that you cannot use the money to make up for your action" doesn't compile. Does it mean I cannot use the money to generate positive utility in any way? So, effectively the money isn't worth anything by definition?
Some cool results:
Story types survey: I am way more escapist than everyone else.
Big 5: I am surprised to see that LW is less conscientious than average. I am very conscientious and very disagreeable.
Research evaluation survey: liberals are virtually immune to motivated skepticism, closely followed by libertarians.
I have had a good past life compared to the rest of LW.
Apparently I flubbed one of the abstract logic problems (a misread, I guess), yet the group average is 100.0% That must not include me in that average...
Question on the first survey (which I am still taking) -- I'm trying to make sure I'm not interrpeting the scenario incorrectly. V qba'g frr nalguvat va gur vafgehpgvbaf gung jbhyq cebuvovg zr sebz tvivat unys gur zbarl gb gur ivpgvzf bs zl onq npgf nsgrejneq. Vf guvf n gbb-pbairavrag ernqvat bs gur fheirl?
ROT13'd bit is concerned with one or more of the morality surveys.
V'z phevbhf nobhg gur trareny rssrpg bs zbbq ba zbenyvgl-eryngrq dhrfgvbaanverf. Zvar inevrf dhvgr n ovg, fb V guvax gung gur snpg gung V'z abg ratntrq va fbpvny npgvivgl gbavtug be irel unccl qebcf zl 'unez' vzcbegnapr ol n ynetr nzbhag (creuncf nybat gur yvarf gung unccl crbcyr graq gb srry zber urycshy.)
Did anyone else notice similar effects?
On the sacredness study my scores were quite close to the rest of lesswrong, except on ingroup questions where the LW average was 2.9 and I averaged 5.7. I think this was based on my answers for the questions about phggvat bss pbagnpg jvgu lbhe snzvyl (V'z zneevrq) and yrnivat lbhe cevznel fbpvny tebhc (genqvgvbany qnapr naq zhfvp ner n ovt cneg bs zl yvsr).
From the "Moral Foundations Questionnaire". Can someone tell me what does this even mean?
I need some help to understand the results of the survey "Sacredness + Cartoon Rating Scale." The results in terms of money it would take to violate a certain foundation are very accurate, the results in "scores of importantness" are almost the complete opposite of my actual scales. Am I missing something?