Postscript: My Super Bowl contest was a success. In summary, four of my students–out of a total of 31 participants–correctly predicted that the Kansas City Chiefs would win the championship game by three points. Overall, my “wisdom of crowds” test predicted a close contest, since 15 students picked the Chiefs to win by an average of 7 points, while 16 students thought the Eagles would win by an average of 7.1 points (see my previous Super Bowl LVII post below).
On Friday 2/10, I invited the students in my business law survey course to predict which team will win the Super Bowl (the Kansas City Chiefs or the Philadelphia Eagles?) and by how many points? Then, on Sunday morning 2/12, I tallied up the results. In summary, a total of 31 students made predictions about the outcome of the championship game: 15 students predicted the Chiefs would win by an average of 7 points, while 16 students predicted the Eagles would win by an average of 7.1 points. These data are pictured in the table below:
For my part, I originally conducted this survey because I wanted to test the so-called “Wisdom of Crowds” hypothesis (i.e., I was going to base my prediction on the aggregate of student predictions), but how should I aggregate these data? By a narrow margin (one vote of over 30 votes cast), more students overall…
View original post 21 more words
prior probability 