Difference between revisions of "Mind-reading"
Chris Chiego (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<onlyinclude>'''Mind-reading''' is the process of attempting to figure out where a [[question]] is going based off of context. It differs from [[lateral thinking]] in that the player relies not on past factual knowledge or deductive thinking but rather from heuristics and gut feeling.</onlyinclude> | <onlyinclude>'''Mind-reading''' is the process of attempting to figure out where a [[question]] is going based off of context. It differs from [[lateral thinking]] in that the player relies not on past factual knowledge or deductive thinking but rather from heuristics and gut feeling.</onlyinclude> | ||
| − | ==In bad quizbowl== | + | ==In "bad quizbowl"== |
| − | The term originated in [[bad quizbowl]] [[format]]s, where it was much more feasible to rely entirely off of loose approximations like "The only Romanian leader they ask about at this [[difficulty]] is Ceausescu," or "The [[mythology]] [[editor]] of this [[set]] loves Finnish myth." In some cases, mind-reading relies on known aspects of the [[question writer]], such as the original writer for [[Academic Hallmarks]]'s affinity for Western novels and geography, the poem the Jabberwock, and other pet topics. | + | The term originated in "[[bad quizbowl]]" [[format]]s, where it was much more feasible to rely entirely off of loose approximations like "The only Romanian leader they ask about at this [[difficulty]] is Ceausescu," or "The [[mythology]] [[editor]] of this [[set]] loves Finnish myth." In some cases, mind-reading relies on known aspects of the [[question writer]], such as the original writer for [[Academic Hallmarks]]'s affinity for Western novels and geography, the poem the Jabberwock, and other pet topics. |
| − | Questions that reward mind-reading are the worst kind of [[speed check]]s in that they often punish players who might know about more about a subject (e.g. Romanian leaders other than Ceausescu). For instance, a [[tossup]] that begins "This Romanian leader..." may make a player who knows of multiple Romanian leaders pause and wait for more clues to specify which Romanian leader | + | Questions that reward mind-reading are the worst kind of [[speed check]]s in that they often punish players who might know about more about a subject (e.g. Romanian leaders other than Ceausescu). For instance, a [[tossup]] that begins "This Romanian leader..." may make a player who knows of multiple Romanian leaders pause and wait for more clues to specify which Romanian leader, while a player who only knows one Romanian leader can feel comfortable buzzing immediately without the [[burden of knowledge]]. |
| − | ==In good quizbowl== | + | ==In "good quizbowl"== |
| − | The concept of mind-reading can be applied to [[good quizbowl]] questions: a player who has knowledge of a set's writers and their strengths may be able to make inferences about which subjects they would be more or less likely to write about | + | The concept of mind-reading can be applied to "[[good quizbowl]]" questions: a player who has knowledge of a set's writers and their strengths may be able to make inferences about which subjects they would be more or less likely to write about. A successful mind-reading buzz might be accompanied by a proclamation from the player that the editor or writer "loves that book!" This can be used maliciously by a player who observes the social media of an editor to determine what they are reading or particularly enjoys. |
Some level of this is unavoidable, due to the nature of how quizbowl sets are written and the friendships among quizbowl players, writers, and editors, but explicitly seeking out information about writers to try to determine what they are writing about is [[sportsmanship|frowned upon]]. Similarly, it is typically expected that writers and editors will not publicly speak about topics which may appear in sets which they are writing for, or at least that they will not emphasis particular clues. | Some level of this is unavoidable, due to the nature of how quizbowl sets are written and the friendships among quizbowl players, writers, and editors, but explicitly seeking out information about writers to try to determine what they are writing about is [[sportsmanship|frowned upon]]. Similarly, it is typically expected that writers and editors will not publicly speak about topics which may appear in sets which they are writing for, or at least that they will not emphasis particular clues. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Mind-reading is additionally a concern in questions with clues that are too vague to be helpful, or questions on descriptive concepts. If it is difficult to follow the writer's train of thought to the answer without figuratively "reading their mind", then a question may suffer from low [[end conversion]]. | ||
==Other uses== | ==Other uses== | ||
| − | Colloquially, mind-reading can also refer to the process of quickly deciphering the [[theme]] of a complicated question. This idea appears very literally in | + | Colloquially, mind-reading can also refer to the process of quickly deciphering the [[theme]] of a complicated question. This idea appears very literally in novelty packets where particularly vague questions may conclude with simply "[[For 10 points]], read my mind" or where prompts may be replaced with the instruction to "Read my mind better." |
[[Category: quizbowl lingo]] | [[Category: quizbowl lingo]] | ||
Latest revision as of 09:58, 17 September 2023
Mind-reading is the process of attempting to figure out where a question is going based off of context. It differs from lateral thinking in that the player relies not on past factual knowledge or deductive thinking but rather from heuristics and gut feeling.
In "bad quizbowl"
The term originated in "bad quizbowl" formats, where it was much more feasible to rely entirely off of loose approximations like "The only Romanian leader they ask about at this difficulty is Ceausescu," or "The mythology editor of this set loves Finnish myth." In some cases, mind-reading relies on known aspects of the question writer, such as the original writer for Academic Hallmarks's affinity for Western novels and geography, the poem the Jabberwock, and other pet topics.
Questions that reward mind-reading are the worst kind of speed checks in that they often punish players who might know about more about a subject (e.g. Romanian leaders other than Ceausescu). For instance, a tossup that begins "This Romanian leader..." may make a player who knows of multiple Romanian leaders pause and wait for more clues to specify which Romanian leader, while a player who only knows one Romanian leader can feel comfortable buzzing immediately without the burden of knowledge.
In "good quizbowl"
The concept of mind-reading can be applied to "good quizbowl" questions: a player who has knowledge of a set's writers and their strengths may be able to make inferences about which subjects they would be more or less likely to write about. A successful mind-reading buzz might be accompanied by a proclamation from the player that the editor or writer "loves that book!" This can be used maliciously by a player who observes the social media of an editor to determine what they are reading or particularly enjoys.
Some level of this is unavoidable, due to the nature of how quizbowl sets are written and the friendships among quizbowl players, writers, and editors, but explicitly seeking out information about writers to try to determine what they are writing about is frowned upon. Similarly, it is typically expected that writers and editors will not publicly speak about topics which may appear in sets which they are writing for, or at least that they will not emphasis particular clues.
Mind-reading is additionally a concern in questions with clues that are too vague to be helpful, or questions on descriptive concepts. If it is difficult to follow the writer's train of thought to the answer without figuratively "reading their mind", then a question may suffer from low end conversion.
Other uses
Colloquially, mind-reading can also refer to the process of quickly deciphering the theme of a complicated question. This idea appears very literally in novelty packets where particularly vague questions may conclude with simply "For 10 points, read my mind" or where prompts may be replaced with the instruction to "Read my mind better."