Agreed. I took one game to calibrate (I've just never worked with scatter plots much and had no idea what various P-levels "looked like") and got ~30 on my second game. What finally killed me was a streak of low correlations - Eyeballing gives me no idea if it's a 0.05 or a 0.35. Anything 0.45 - 0.8 seemed pretty easy. I didn't really get anything over 0.85.
Fantastic... I teach quant research at the grad level. Game is simple and fun-ish. Learning to visualize and think about correlations for the first time can be tough—game is perfect to engage students and supplement textbooks, lecture.
My physics prof was fond of saying "Your intuition sucks."
I played by following my intuition and did quite well in the higher end but found the lower end much harder. I'm guessing because I was feeling my way through it, my brain was trying to see patterns even where there weren't any, pushing my guesses higher than the plot showed.
No negative correlation?
Also, it seems the human mind is estimating the robust correlation, but the game is estimating the classical one. This can explain the discrepancy at low and high values.
Guess a username that isn't in use might be a more appropriate name for the game. And why do I care what you think I should be called anyway?
Bonus "this site is showing frequent pop-ups; do you wish to disable further alerts from this site?" Damn right I do.
Perhaps if the author had spent a little more on the UX and a little less on the pixelated UI then it would have been something I would have vested more time in.
