Yeah. The question for me is: is that "1% better driver" compared to the average? In that case, it's still going to drive worse than 49% of the driving population. On the other hand, if it's 1% better than the 95th percentile, then yeah, that makes sense as a target to me.
Slightly better than average doesn't sound that great to me.
It's also a bad example. "A better driver" is a subjective term and may mean different things to different people. In fact, I would be surprised if fewer than 60% of drivers were in the top 50% when measured objectively on their own criteria.
tl;dr ... a minor objection tough ... it is not at all impossible for 70 percent of drivers to be better than average, you just need the lower 30 percent to (on average) be really bad
Not to mention that "better driver than average" is a very fuzzy definition, and more than 50% probably hit at least one of the possible categories, e.g. safer? Quicker reaction time? More pleasant to other drivers? Most comfortable to ride with? More technically skilled when it comes to difficult conditions? Able and willing to go fastest? Gets the fewest speeding tickets? Etc.
Good point, but if you follow through to the source of the driving statistic that Derek quoted, they're actually using the median rather than the mean. Also, you've defined the "goodness" of drivers as a discrete measure. If you defined it as a continuous measure (say, a function of risky behavior and fuel consumption), then it is impossible by definition for more than 50% of drivers to be above average.
Sure, but that only works because you've chosen a discrete measure of how "good" a driver is. If you defined a "good" driver by some other measure (say, a function of risky behavior and fuel consumption), then 50% of drivers would be above the median and 50% would be below, by definition.
I laughed at that statistic the first time I read it, but it isn’t ridiculous. 80% of drivers consider themselves better than what they think of as the average (mean) driver, not average (mode) driver. Same for most surveys. People see how bad the worst is, how good the best is, and then place themselves somewhere above the middle of that range.
This assumes a lot about the correctness of people's perceptions of their own driving skills. My experience is 99% of drivers think they're above average, and that obviously can't be true.
Are “good” human drivers an order of magnitude better than “average” human drivers? Because that’s where I put my bar: marginally better than “good”, an order of magnitude better than “average”.
Slightly better than average doesn't sound that great to me.
reply