Login
You're viewing the front-end.social public feed.
  • Feb 1, 2026, 8:36 PM

    Finally, I think I'll leave you with some of the feedback given by the control group:

    - "This was a lot of fun but the recording aspect can be cumbersome on
    some systems and cause a little bit of anxiety especially when you can’t
    go back if you messed up the recording."

    - "I think I could have done much better if I could have accessed the coding tasks I did at part 2 during the quiz for reference, but I still tried my best. I ran out of time as the bug-finding questions
    were quite challenging for me."

    - "I spent too much time on this quiz, but that was due to my time management.
    Even if I hadn’t spent too much time on the first part, though, it still
    would have been a tight finish for me in the 30 minute window I think."

    To me, these read like stress. It's so disappointing that the study was designed in such a stressful way. Even moreso that the subject's stress doesn't seem to have been considered as a factor at all. That plus the tooling handicap of the control group make it impossible to draw the kind of conclusions that the authors and Anthropic seem to be doing.

    /end

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 22

Replies

  • Feb 2, 2026, 1:08 AM

    Actually, one last thing.

    I don't think this study was well designed, but I don't want to go much farther than that.

    Some people have made something out of the paper not being peer reviewed. That's not a secret, though. This is arxiv, it's a prepublication host.

    Also, I glanced at the lead author's other work, and I get the impression that she's just not accustomed to working with human subjects. I think that's hubris, but not malice. It's just the standard attitude in tech that being good at computer touching qualifies one to do virtually anything else they want.

    💬 0🔄 6⭐ 26