1. “To See Ourselves as Others See Us”
The view from Mechanical Turkistan
Silivalley Quantified Self March 20, 2013
Paul Whitmore Sas paul_sas@intuit.com

3. Methods for Collecting Social Ratings
“Dynamical Dinner Party” – passive rating with anonymity was
desired
Pilot at Qself Meetup 7/21/09 at Jump Associates
Sparse data: Michael Vassar 6 ratings, the other 5 volunteers fewer
Columbia B School entering classes collect “360 ratings” (Sheena Iyengar)
Disparity between self-concept & social perspective is large
Super Sad True Love Story (2011) – Broadcast credit score
Can we get closer to real-time monitoring of one’s whuffie score?

4. Interface to Mechanical Turk – Human Instruction Task (HIT)
$0.45 for 5 mins =
$5.40/hour

6. Men’s Ratings (n=29) vs Women’s (n=15)
Clear 9.9% Male Higher
Intelligent 9.9% Male Higher
Expressive 9.9% Male Higher
Appealing -7.6% Female Higher
Easy to follow 9.7% Male Higher
Masculine -4.4% Female Higher
Interesting -11.3% Female Higher
Nasal 22.3% Male Higher
Unusual -12.2% Female Higher
Annoying 24.8% Male Higher
Arrogant 27.8% Male Higher

7. Demographics in Mechanical Turkistan

8. Next Steps?
Self-presentation questions answered in near real-time:
Should I keep the hat?
Which outfit to wear to an upcoming event?
Dynamics of speaking style could be complexified
Who’s my ideal wing-person?