34% of White Uni Applicants lie about their race, says study

A clear case for banning contentious category quizzing, and the use of randomised selection for ALL qualified applicants?

Read on


2 Responses

  1. questionaires can’t be trusted unless sofisicated interrogation techniques are used. That is why sortition in combination with “selected particcipants” is unacceptable

    5 Reasons When Respondents are Knowingly Dishonest:

    – Respondents want to appear better than they are. Whether that’s cooler, richer, more beautiful respondents lie to build their self-worth.

    – Respondents give socially desirable answers. Survey estimates of respondent voting are always higher than actual voter turnout. That’s because you’re supposed to vote, right? So respondents lie about whether they vote or not.

    – They don’t want to answer questions about sensitive behavior. Sex. –
    – Personal finance. Drug and alcohol use. Illegal behaviors. Respondents are always more likely to lie about sensitive topics.

    – People want to give the answer they believe will “help” or “please” the researcher. Many people just want to help you (the researcher) out. And so they make up responses based on their belief about what you need.

    – Respondents believe they can influence the outcome of the research in their favor. If you absolutely love the product concept, you may say you will buy it more frequently than you actually think you will, in hopes of getting it introduced into the marketplace.

    https://www.infosurv.com/5-reasons-why-survey-respondents-dont-tell-the-truth/ https://www.decisionanalyst.com/blog/questionnairebias/ and so on


  2. Michael Sandel’s The Tyranny of Merit (2020) includes an appeal for sortition in higher education candidate selection:

    Setting a threshold of qualification and letting chance decide the rest would restore some sanity to the high school years, and relieve, at least to some extent, the soul-killing, résumé-stuffing, perfection-seeking experience they have become. It would also deflate meritocratic hubris, by making clear what is true in any case, that those who land on top do not make it on their own but owe their good fortune to family circumstance and native gifts that are morally akin to the luck of the draw.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: