"Why You Believe The Things You Do: Evaluating ChatGPT vs. Google on 500 Search Queries"

"Why You Believe The Things You Do: Evaluating ChatGPT vs. Google on 500 Search Queries"

In our quest to understand why we believe the things we do, we decided to evaluate two prominent search engines: ChatGPT and Google. Surprisingly, our findings revealed that ChatGPT outperformed Google on coding queries and reached a tie on general informational queries, despite not being optimized for a search experience. This discovery led us to delve deeper into each platform, uncovering intriguing insights.

When examining ChatGPT's performance, we noticed that it received higher ratings at the extremes compared to Google. Users preferred ChatGPT on 42% of the queries, while Google garnered 40% preference. The dominance of ChatGPT became even more evident when we focused on coding-specific queries, where it outshined Google 70% of the time. This highlights ChatGPT's ability to synthesize information from various sources, providing a coherent and personalized search experience.

On the positive side, ChatGPT offers a minimal interface, sparing users from scrolling through numerous ads before finding the desired information. Additionally, it excels at understanding complex queries, demonstrating its capability to differentiate between similar concepts and provide accurate results. For instance, ChatGPT can identify that the "largest active volcano in the mainland of the United States" specifically excludes volcanoes in Hawaii.

However, ChatGPT does have its drawbacks. It occasionally produces hallucinations and inaccuracies, presented with unwavering confidence. While images, videos, and tweets hold importance in certain scenarios, ChatGPT's reliance solely on text-based responses may limit its ability to provide comprehensive answers.

Our exploration into why we believe certain things uncovered fascinating psychological factors. We discovered that our beliefs are influenced by our desire for them to be true. The more something helps us deal with uncertainty, the lower the threshold for believing it. This phenomenon is especially evident during times of crisis, such as the Great Plague of London, where people turned to prophecies and superstitions for hope.

Furthermore, we encountered Gibson's Law, which humorously states that for every PhD argument, there is an equal and opposite PhD argument. This highlights the availability of experts willing to support any belief or claim, often driven by personal motives rather than the pursuit of truth. Beliefs serve various purposes, such as justifying past actions, protecting reputations, providing hope, maximizing income, and signaling tribal belonging.

The allure of a belief can overshadow its truth. Our memories are selective, emphasizing certain details while discarding others. This leads to sharpening and leveling, shaping our recollection of experiences. Our beliefs heavily rely on our subjective experiences, emphasizing those that confirm stereotypes, connect dots between other experiences, and create compelling narratives.

Changing our minds is a rare occurrence, despite its importance in embracing new information. We tend to cling to false beliefs, fearing the admission of mistakes. However, the core of a scientific lifestyle lies in the ability to change our minds when confronted with contradicting information. Richard Feynman, a renowned physicist, championed the concept of "distrust of experts" as a cornerstone of science. Yet, herd mentality and blind faith in authority figures remain prevalent, often overshadowing logical reasoning.

Beliefs extend beyond mere knowledge; they act as social signals, conveying information about how we establish our beliefs, our confidence in our intelligence, and our ability to transmit reliable truth to others. Ideally, we should seek experts who are willing to change their minds based on new evidence. However, in reality, we often gravitate towards individuals who exude unwavering confidence, providing us with a false sense of certainty.

Ultimately, our beliefs are not solely driven by truth-seeking; they also arise from a desire to eliminate uncertainty. This inherent human trait leads us to believe in things that may bear little relation to reality. To navigate this cognitive bias, we must embrace a scientific mindset that values the willingness to change our views when confronted with conflicting information.

Based on our exploration, here are three actionable pieces of advice:

• 1. Embrace skepticism: Question your beliefs and be open to challenging them. Actively seek diverse perspectives and evidence that may contradict your views.

• 2. Seek reliable sources: When searching for information, consider utilizing platforms like ChatGPT and Google, but always cross-reference multiple sources to ensure accuracy.

• 3. Foster a growth mindset: Cultivate a mindset that embraces intellectual flexibility and the willingness to change your opinions when confronted with new evidence. Celebrate the act of changing your mind as a sign of growth rather than weakness.

In conclusion, our evaluation of ChatGPT vs. Google on 500 search queries not only highlighted the performance differences between the platforms but also shed light on the complex nature of beliefs. Understanding why we believe certain things can empower us to navigate the information landscape more effectively and make informed decisions. By embracing skepticism, seeking reliable sources, and fostering a growth mindset, we can strive for a more accurate and nuanced understanding of the world around us.