I think there's an anchoring effect in play here. If you select blue -> blue -> green -> blue -> green -> blue -> green…, you land at the population median.

(The point being that, once you get to a somewhat ambiguous point (after two blue selections), you can say "oh, well, compared to the last one this is {opposite color}!", and it seems most people do that.)

▲

burkaman 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I wouldn't assume most people do that. For me the last few looked basically the same so I selected the same color for all of them.

	▲	Paracompact an hour ago \| parent [-]
		You can't assume most people do that, but you also can't assume most people do not do that.

▲

djmips 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My boundary was hue 188, bluer than 98% of the population, for me turquoise is green and then it shows an overall chart which I have to agree with so no, I don't agree with your assessment. I often get into blue/green arguments with my children and that's when I started to suspect that it was personal opinion.

▲

muzani 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's if you're matching about 40% of the population.

For some, it might be blue -> blue -> blue -> blue -> green -> blue -> green -> blue.

▲

layer8 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That doesn’t explain why I landed 92% off the population median.

▲

make3 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

it's a binary search, not too surprising. search over a unidimensional ordered space