❗️ New Paper Alert ❗️ @duncanjwatts and I introduce a framework for quantifying common sense at individual 👤 and collective 🫂 levels pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn… 🪡
Mark Whiting
13.6K posts
Mark Whiting
@MarkWhiting
Research at @pareto_ai & @CSSPenn → whiting.me
Previously: @StanfordHCI, @CMUEngineering, @KAISTpr & @RMIT.
- ⁉️ Could we identify disastrous team dynamics before they spiral out of control? 🌀 Our new @ACM_CSCW (#cscw2020) paper classifies team viability from collaboration transcripts — viability.stanford.edu — and we are elated it received Best Paper Honorable Mention 🏅🧵
- ⁉️ Are individuals or groups more consistant when making judgements? A new @sig_chi (#CHI2021) paper from @xemilyhu, me and @msbernst shows that they're actually quite similar ⚖️, as long as the group deliberates 🗣 — hci.stanford.edu/publications/2… 🧵
- ⁉️Have you ever wondered if you could reset a fractured team 💔, so they'd start again on the right foot 👣and stay there. ❤️ I'm excited to announce a new paper that addresses this question 📣 — dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/33… 🧵
- If @quip added support for LaTeX equations, inline and in code blocks, the world would be a better place.
- I made something 🛠️ to visualize state leanings as more votes are counted 🗳️. observablehq.com/@markwhiting/v… I used symlog 🪵 to highlight the incredibly small margins and small percentages of votes in play. Data is from @nytimes 📰, aggregated 👐 by @alex_gaynor, @frewsxcv and others.
- Replying to @MarkWhitingWe build on our earlier paper introducing 2-way pseudonym masking to study team fracture 💥 — dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/33… — with other fabulous people: @ablaisin1, Chloe Barreau (chloebarreau.github.io), @thelaurafiuza, @nrmarda, @stanfordmav & @msbernst 🧵
- Replying to @jakehofman @brendan642 and 4 othersI’ve been using estimation plots recently — dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41592… — though they are not always easy for people to interpret either.
- Replying to @MarkWhitingThere's a small portion of claims that most people agree on, and small groups of people who agree on most things, but there's little volume in between these extremes. There're no large groups of claims that large groups of people believe in common. Common sense is not common.
- Replying to @stevenstrogatzHere's how they all lean by portion of votes reported. observablehq.com/@markwhiting/v…
- Replying to @brendan642 @jakehofman and 4 others@adamcchang and @jacuzzijo also made a useful resource (and libraries) for visualizing various common situations with this — estimationstats.com
- Replying to @rjsSure. I feel like it sits squarely within new product development but I don’t know of a nice term that captures those aspects. Unearthing?
- Replying to @nrmardaYes. Thought they've started making some changes after a few years of ownership. I've gradually switched to @LibraryThing
- New paper announcement📄, but first, a poll: If we could rewind time 🕰 (and memory🧠) to re-try a case freshly ⚖️, would we be more likely to get the same outcome both times via…a jury (a group)35.5%a judge (an individual)41.9%either (no difference)16.1%Another answer...6.5%31 votesFinal results
