A living experiment in projection

How common was the choice you made?

The 1977 table shows people who made opposite choices also gave different estimates of what peers would choose. Make one choice, forecast this page's crowd, then watch differential projection separate from actual calibration as the living reference population grows.

Choose before the crowd appears

Random item

One low-stakes hypothetical, randomly assigned in this browser session. No result is shown until an accepted send. Your answer has no correct side.

Step 1, your choice

Loading the assigned item...

Step 3, prior exposure

Before today, how familiar were you with this effect or its 1977 study?

Exact payload, before send

Complete all three steps. Nothing has been sent.

No network write has occurred.

Checking the store without sending...

The check

This is the part with sharp edges. The analysis is fixed, the old table is reproduced before the living display can open, and every limitation that changes the claim is kept beside it.

The sealed analysis

Expected SHA-256: e7244f8696ff53e14c43d065a84ac224858b3c181dd4a7d29981cf5b969db57b

Checking live bytes...

curl -s https://artwaste.land/strata/false-consensus/analysis.mjs | shasum -a 256
The historical gate

The living display is locked if any Table 1 row stops reproducing its expected gap, derived from the printed means, or the printed summary. One-byte seal mutations and wrong-cell anchor mutations are both required to fail offline.

What D means

D is mean option-A forecast among A choosers minus the same mean among B choosers. Positive D is differential projection. It is not automatic evidence of error, because a person's own response can be legitimate sample-of-one information.

The stronger layer

The accepted crowd supplies a descriptive target the 1977 study did not independently measure. Every calibration number, the two side errors and the pooled forecast error alike, scores forecasts against the other accepted rows only, never against a share that includes the forecaster's own row. These values are exact for these rows, not for society; the paired sequences bound population contrasts under their stated conditions.

The intake is narrower than planned

The frozen store accepts only item, choice, estimate, and exposure. It has field validation, a per-IP daily limit, a global daily limit, and a row cap. It has no signed assignment token, honeypot, elapsed-time field, or burst flag. Therefore this page has no honest raw-versus-screened split and says accepted row, never screened person.

One row is not one person

The browser assignment is random for this session and the local contributed marker is advisory. A cleared browser, another device, coordinated submissions, and bots remain possible. No demographics, free text, account, email, precise time, location, user agent, or fingerprint enters the declared payload.

The sequence guarantee

The twelve streams use alpha 0.05/12 and a 401-point betting grid. Time-uniform validity assumes a stable data-generating mean and predictable bets. It does not make these self-selected visitors representative, remove drift, or repair dependence and gaming.

Small counts stay small

At zero, the page says zero. Before both choices reach 10 accepted rows on an item, only counts appear. Calibration and D are suppressed. Early ground truth changes every time a row arrives.

The old archive ends at aggregates

No participant-level 1977 data, code, or open data archive was located in the documented search. The one-decimal cells cannot recover distributions, standard deviations, F tests, p values, or participant dots. The displayed F statistic is reported, not reproduced.

The task changed

This crowd is global, self-selected, online, choice-first, unpaid, and answering one trivial new item. The 1977 participants were Stanford undergraduates answering consequential vignettes, with estimates before choices. Culture, order, item stakes, medium, and familiarity may all change the result.

The machine parser keeps the wreckage

Only a complete JSON object with exactly two valid keys becomes a value. Refusals and unparseable outputs remain in the denominator, with counts and rates. No regex extraction, repair, reprompt, silent drop, or forced balance is allowed. The result file has no frozen human snapshot, so human-target forecasts cannot honestly be scored against a later moving crowd.

Unresolved history

The often repeated meta-analytic r = .31 was not used because the 1985 full results pages were not directly inspected. Its title and publisher record say 115 tests, not the conflicting 155 found in one later reference. No correction or retraction was located for the 1977 or 1985 article as of 2026-08-21, which is a search result, not proof of absence.

Analysis declaration: loading

Sources and exactly what each supports

Ross, Greene, and House (1977): article identity, Table 1 cells, sample description, study order, and printed F statistic. The article is copyrighted; only numerical facts and minimal labels are transcribed.

Klein et al. (2018), Many Labs 2: large preregistered replication and corrected historical summary. Its open participant data are not relabelled as the original and are not shipped on this page.

Dawes (1989): why a self-response can rationally move a prevalence estimate, making the classic relative difference insufficient to prove error.

Waudby-Smith and Ramdas: betting confidence sequences for bounded means. The site kit implements the disclosed predictable plug-in, hedged betting process.

Choi, Hong, and Kim, arXiv:2407.12007v2: prior language-model study, including its famous scenarios and imposed-choice workaround. This page uses new low-stakes items and free samples.

Connections in the Wasteland

The Guess It Showed You First fixes a prediction before a choice. Here the whole analysis is fixed before an accumulating crowd.

Ask a Random Friend shows how the route through a population changes the statistic. Here self-selection and own-choice conditioning define the route.

The Positive Test That's Probably Wrong separates an intuitive estimate from the population base rate. Here the crowd itself becomes the changing base rate.