The analytical folks chose the options with the highest expected payouts. The intuitives chose the options with the worst expected payouts.

The analytical folks were able to properly understand the mini-riddles, whereas the intuitives were confused by the mini-riddles and simply chose what appeared to be (but were in fact not) the safer bets.

First you separate people into two groups according to their responses to a few mini-riddles - the questions given in the first post of this series. Those who answered the mini-riddles properly were categorized as analytics, those who got the questions wrong are deemed intuitives.

You then have these two groups of people answer some more mini riddles - the ones posted on this page. And what a surprise we find! The analytics were more likely to answer these mini-riddles correctly than were the intuitives.

Incredible!

Again, for the trained mathematical/statistical mind, there are correct and incorrect answers, assuming your personal finances are sufficient to allow you to follow logic (for example, you might not have enough cash to afford to pay $100).

B to receive. (termed "Risk" in graphs)
A to give. (termed "Certain" in graphs)

These are the correct answers to maximize your probability to make money.

Again, like I commented about the Part II test results, what's "intuitive" about getting the wrong answer? Again, this lumps all the trained statisticians in a category together. So is the claim that all trained mathematicians are not intuitive? Like Albert Einstein was not intuitive? If not, fix the test, and you'll get the benefit of a stronger correlation, and less miscategorization of people who take your test.

I briefly left mathematics for psychology because I was so interested in it. Then I became disillusioned because of all the lumping of people into categories based on a measely 85% correlation. These three parts tell me a worse side to the story--improperly designed tests. Glad I left.

But imagine if instead it was a choice of a certain $1,000,000 or a chance for $3,000,000.

I know the expected value but I would still take the $1,000,000.

I find this topic very interesting. I am no doubt an analytical thinker, but my choices are not strictly analytical.

Of course this is not that simple. It also, depends on my current situation (financial situation, among others) and personality (patient or impatient discussed in part IV), which in fact will affect my choices.