Rewording and Reworking 8Values From The Ground Up
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
评估
- 难度
- 4/5
- 预计耗时
- 3-5 天
- 新手友好度
- 45/100
- Issue 类型
- 功能
- 描述清晰度
- 基本清楚
- 活跃度
- 停滞
- 技术栈
- html, javascript
调研方向
测试问题和评分逻辑位于 repository 的 JavaScript 和 HTML 文件中。首先检查问题数据结构和评分算法,以了解各轴是如何计算的。然后,确定并重新设计问题,为每个轴创建平衡的配对,确保数量为偶数。最后,使用 JavaScript 数组洗牌来实现问题随机化。
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
描述
So I have been thinking of some ways to help improve the quality of the test and solve some commonly seen complains about it.
Firstly is the perceived bias many say they see in the test. Most individuals I've heard criticism from complain of a left-leaning bias in the test. I struggled to find a way to easily quantify this supposed bias, until I found a rather simple, yet elegant solution. Clicking the same answer on each question, for example "Strongly Agree", the final results should roughly even out to be 50/50 in each category, or lose to it. This is because in a properly balanced test, a survey topic should be approached by asking two questions. Each question is the opposite of the other, meaning that if answered the same way, the results would cancel out to a net-zero change in the final results for the survey. This is an easy way to tell what bias a survey might have, and how badly it is skewed in one direction or another. As an example, I used this method on the Political Compass test and you can see the results below:

As you can see, the economic axis of the graph came out to be exactly 0, but the authoritarian/libertarian axis has an obvious, and rather large, skew towards the libertarian end of the compass.
Following this procedure, I used this method on the 8Values test, selecting "Strongly agree" too all questions, and you can see the results below:

You can see that the diplomatic axis is decently balanced, at only a little over 1 percentage point difference. The societal axis, though a few percentage points, is within what I would consider to be an acceptable margin or error. The Economic and Civil axises though are far beyond what a margin of error should cause. It's obvious that there is an imbalance of questions for those two parts that leads to a very large, 20 point gap total between the two sides of each axis. (Please note that selecting all "Strong Disagree" to the questions will result in a mirror opposite of the results shown above, with the same numbers being reversed on the axis scales.)
So firstly, we need to go back and we work the questions to include two for each basic idea being asked, each having an opposite view from the other. For example, one question could be, "I support single-payer, universal healthcare" while the second one could be "I do not support government welfare for medical needs". This suits the opposing view for the same topic, and also insure that people who fall below the "Universal healthcare", but above "No Welfare" have an option to click. This also means that there will always need to be an even number of questions in the test, though I don't see why that should be an issue.
Secondly, we need to get rid of questions that contain double negatives. Double negatives might be ok in grammar, but in a survey they will lead to confusion about what option to pick. For example, instead of saying, "No authority should be left unquestioned", say, "All authority should be questioned", as was mentioned in another issue thread #64
Finally, I think one other thing that would go a long way towards helping to ease fears of bias is to have the questions be randomized each time a user takes the test. This shouldn't be too terribly hard to achieve with just some JavaScript, an Array, and a random number generator. This would help make the test less predictable and more unique each time someone takes it.
These are just a few of my suggestions to help make the 8Values test truly great! Let me know what y'all think of these suggestions, or if you have any additions to add to them! 😃
- 主要语言
- HTML
- 星标
- 1.1k
- 派生
- 452
- PR 合并指标
- 30 天内没有已合并 PR
环境准备
这个项目没有提供开发容器、Dockerfile 或贡献指南,环境需要你自己搭建:先看它的 README,通用步骤见我们的新手贡献指南。
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
8values/8values.github.io 的其他 Issue
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 75/100
8values/8values.github.io#184 ·
-
难度 1/5 1 小时以内 新手友好度 70/100
8values/8values.github.io#183 · 8 个 reaction ·
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 70/100
8values/8values.github.io#179 · 2 条评论 · 4 个 reaction ·
-
难度 1/5 1 小时以内 新手友好度 80/100
8values/8values.github.io#152 ·
-
Libertarian Socialist should be Democratic Socialist in many cases可能重新可做 关联的 PR 已关闭且未合并。 未关闭calibration
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 65/100
8values/8values.github.io#150 · 3 条评论 ·
查看 8values/8values.github.io 的全部 Issue
相似的 Issue
-
check:passed streams:add
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 68/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
needs review new event
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
processing/processing-community-day#333 · 1 条评论 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
feedback simulation workshop
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
githubnext/gh-aw-workshop#4218 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
good first issue quality
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 76/100
StudentSuite/awesome-student-resources#554 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
content good first issue
难度 2/5 1 小时以内 新手友好度 88/100
StudentSuite/awesome-skills-plugins-for-students#297 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复