Thanks Nathan. The blue line represents higher ratings of longtermist causes (left to right) and the yellow line represents higher ratings of neartermist causes (left to right).
So, you can see that higher prioritization of longtermist causes is associated with lower ratings of concern (the blue line decreases left-right) and higher prioritization of neartermist causes is associated with higher ratings of concern (the yellow line increases left to right).
This approach has some advantages over just showing a single ‘longtermism vs neartermism score’ (even though that would be simpler). Although you might imagine that average support for longtermist and neartermist causes would simply be mirror images of each other and both have the same association with concern related to FTX, theoretically there’s no reason this has to be the case. For example, it could be that there’s a relationship between support for longtermist causes and concerns related to FTX, but not support for neartermist causes.
We’ll discuss the relationship between the different dimensions more in the dedicated cause prioritization post of the series. (And, to be clear, I think there are some cases where it makes sense to use a single longtermism-vs-neartermism score; we’ve used both approaches before e.g. here and here).
If it helps, you can simply look at the relationship between longtermism (left) and neartermism (right) separately, and ignore the other.
I think it is relatively safe in this instance to look at the relationship with mean longtermism-minus-neartermism scores (shown below), but only because we first examined the individual relationships (shown above) above since- as I noted in my reply to Nathan- support for longtermist causes and neartermist causes don’t reflect a single dimension.
Sorry what does “cause prioritisation (average) mean here? I feel like I expect one line from 1 to 5 not 2 lines?
Thanks Nathan. The blue line represents higher ratings of longtermist causes (left to right) and the yellow line represents higher ratings of neartermist causes (left to right).
So, you can see that higher prioritization of longtermist causes is associated with lower ratings of concern (the blue line decreases left-right) and higher prioritization of neartermist causes is associated with higher ratings of concern (the yellow line increases left to right).
This approach has some advantages over just showing a single ‘longtermism vs neartermism score’ (even though that would be simpler). Although you might imagine that average support for longtermist and neartermist causes would simply be mirror images of each other and both have the same association with concern related to FTX, theoretically there’s no reason this has to be the case. For example, it could be that there’s a relationship between support for longtermist causes and concerns related to FTX, but not support for neartermist causes.
We’ll discuss the relationship between the different dimensions more in the dedicated cause prioritization post of the series. (And, to be clear, I think there are some cases where it makes sense to use a single longtermism-vs-neartermism score; we’ve used both approaches before e.g. here and here).
I also found these charts a little confusing. A single value for each or a clustered column chart might be clearer
Thanks for the additional comment.
If it helps, you can simply look at the relationship between longtermism (left) and neartermism (right) separately, and ignore the other.
I think it is relatively safe in this instance to look at the relationship with mean longtermism-minus-neartermism scores (shown below), but only because we first examined the individual relationships (shown above) above since- as I noted in my reply to Nathan- support for longtermist causes and neartermist causes don’t reflect a single dimension.