Discrete Events and Narrative Lives (Part 1)
Suppose
your favorite ballplayer, Allen Average, comes to bat in the eighth
inning. His team trails 5-4, there is a
runner on third, and two outs. The
defending team only needs one out to end the inning. You really want Allen to get a hit, which
would bring in the tying run. Now, Mr.
Average is not a great hitter, though he plays excellent defense (which is why
the manager puts Allen in the lineup most days). Allen’s batting average is almost exactly the
league average. Ordinarily, you wouldn’t
feel much confidence in this situation, since as an average hitter Allen fails
to get a hit more than 70% of the time.
But today
is different, you feel. This is Mr.
Average’s fourth plate appearance of the game.
In his first three at-bats, Allen got a hit each time, and one of them
was a double. Allen is having a really
fine day hitting! Allen is “seeing the
ball well,” as professional players often say.
As he approaches the batter’s box, you’re feeling a fine mixture of
dread and hopefulness, the heart of baseball fan experience. On this occasion you’re feeling more hope
than dread. Today is Allen’s day! He’s going to get a hit—at the very least, you
feel he has a better chance today than on other days.
Your
feelings deceive you. Sabermatricians
have explored this question thoroughly.
(SABR is the Society for American Baseball Research. You never may have heard of it, but it’s
real. There are thousands, many
thousands, of nerdy baseball fans well trained in statistical analysis. They have spent millions of hours researching
questions like this one.) They have
asked the question this way: take any player who has had a recent string of
success or failure up to time x, what are his chances of success at time
x+1? Baseball gives multiplied thousands
of examples to check, and the result is clear.
A baseball player’s career average,
his average up to time x, gives a much better prediction of his chances of
success in any particular at-bat (x+1) than his earlier success or failure
today. Given that Allen Average has had
good success in his first three at-bats today, what should we say about his
final at-bat today? Answer: his prior
success today is irrelevant; Mr. Average’s chance of success in his last at-bat
is approximately equal to his overall success rate. Recent success or failure doesn’t matter.
One way to
summarize this lesson is to say that at-bats are discrete events. Each event,
we might say, is causally independent of the others. They are affected by a player’s underlying
talent, but not by recent success or failure.
Today’s narrative (Allen is
having a fine day hitting!) has no discernable effect on the immediate future.
Imagine
another illustration from a different sport.
A basketball player, Tom Terrific, prepares to shoot a free throw. Mr. Terrific is a good shooter; over his
career he has made 85% of his free throws.
Tonight, though, Tom is not shooting free throws very well; he has made
only 6 of 12 free throw attempts. What are
his chances of making this next free throw?
Statistics from professional basketball answer clearly: Tom’s chance of
success on his next free throw (x+1) is indistinguishable from his career
average. His earlier failure tonight
doesn’t matter.
When it
comes to predicting the future, it seems that narrative doesn’t matter
much. And this bothers some people. We want to think that since Allen Average is
having a good day he has a better chance of getting a hit on his next
at-bat. We fear that since Tom Terrific
has missed half of his free throws, he is unlikely to make his next one. But we’re wrong.
Sometimes
people turn narrative expectations on their head. Since Allen has three hits already, they say,
Allen is “due” to make an out. Tom is
too good a shooter to keep missing, they say, so he is almost sure to make the
next one. Again: not true. The next at-bat, the next free throw—in
general, the next discrete event—is independent of recent events. Narrative just doesn’t matter, at least in
the short term.
But people live narratives. Even when we know better, we let the story of
our lives direct our thinking. Here’s an
example.
Once or
twice a month, I play Settlers of Catan
with some friends. If you’re familiar
with Settlers, you will understand my
example easily. If you’ve never played,
the point will still be clear.
In a game
not long ago, I had ten resource cards in my hand when it came to my turn. I rolled a seven, which meant that I lost
half my resource cards. (Game rule:
anytime a seven is rolled, players with more than seven resource cards lose
half of them.) A significant
setback! The next time it came my turn,
again I had a large hand, and again I rolled a seven. Agh! More
resources lost! My next turn: yet again
I lost half my cards due to rolling a seven.
Three times in a row!
Now dice
rolls are discrete events. There is a
1/6 chance of rolling a seven on any particular roll of two dice. By the laws of probability, a person will
roll a seven three times in a row, on average, once in 216 chances. So it’s not impossible. It does happen—rarely. But what about the next dice roll, the x+1 roll?
Since dice rolls are discrete, independent events, the fact that I had
three sevens in a row said nothing about my odds of getting another seven. The chance is still 1/6 of rolling a
seven. As a university professor I teach
logic. I know this.
But we live
narratives. Losing all those resource
cards had torpedoed my chance to win the game.
I was frustrated. So: just before
my next turn, I traded cards with another player, giving up three for one, to
trim my hand to seven cards (thus making me immune to the seven rule). That is: I made a bad trade, a trade that
further reduced my already tiny chances to win the game, because I feared
rolling yet another seven. Obviously an
irrational decision! But I was living a story, a frustrating
story. Narrative can induce crazy
behavior.
By the way,
I rolled another seven.
No comments:
Post a Comment