51–60 of 78 posts
Many replies here try to dispute the methodology and UX in the survey. When it comes to geography, you either know it, or you don't. The distance from Ukraine for many data points is so big, that you can't possibly write it down to projection/UX.
This seems to be a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger effect: the people who know least are the most willing to take action, because their ignorance blinds them to the impracticality and potential consequences of that action. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
This seems to be a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger effect: the people who know least are the most willing to take action, because their ignorance blinds them to the impracticality and potential consequences of that action. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
How did they ask people to locate Ukraine? Some of these points look like somebody accidentally clicked on a random spot of a map. For example, the dot below New Zealand is in the middle of the ocean (approx. -55.000000,176.000000). Some even located it within the US (Florida seems to be a popular guess). Have they found really misinformed people or is this noise in the data?
How did they ask people to locate Ukraine? Some of these points look like somebody accidentally clicked on a random spot of a map. For example, the dot below New Zealand is in the middle of the ocean (approx. -55.000000,176.000000). Some even located it within the US (Florida seems to be a popular guess). Have they found really misinformed people or is this noise in the data?
There seems to be a sharp drop-off line running north/south just west of Mongolia & east of Novosibirsk. I wonder if that is from a side-scrolling artifact or drag/drop interface in the sampling (wild speculation there) or from an unconscious pruning algorithm, among people who are unaware of Ukraine's proximity to the Black Sea, roughly: "hmmh, Ukraine, medium-to-small country, former Soviet, I'll look further east,…
Kazakhstan seems to be an attractor, probably because it's so big.
"Hmmm, so Afghanistan is in that general area, and it's a troubled country, so therefore Ukraine must be thereabouts also."
Many replies here try to dispute the methodology and UX in the survey. When it comes to geography, you either know it, or you don't. The distance from Ukraine for many data points is so big, that you can't possibly write it down to projection/UX.
Many replies here try to dispute the methodology and UX in the survey. When it comes to geography, you either know it, or you don't. The distance from Ukraine for many data points is so big, that you can't possibly write it down to projection/UX.
The UX certainly doesn't help! I've been to Russia and Ukraine several times. I can easily point out Ukraine on a normal map but I must admit that single colored map is a bit confusing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This would correlate with 'I have no idea what I'm doing' "In general, younger Americans tended to provide more accurate responses than their older counterparts: 27 percent of 18-24 year olds correctly identified Ukraine, compared with 14 percent of 65+ year-olds." 65+ year olds spent a big chunk of their lives in the cold war. Presumably they would know more about the geographical breakup of the Soviet Union than 18…
No, people who were in primary school before the breakup of the Soviet Union would probably have never seen the Ukraine on a map, since all they would see is a big red area labeled "Soviet Union". I doubt Soviet internal geography & politics were taught regularly. Younger people may not even know that the Soviet Union ever existed, but they have a much better chance of seeing Ukraine on a map in school.