Not too long ago in class, we discussed the Monty Hall problem. Even as it was explained multiple times, I simply just couldn’t get it. Why in the world would it make a difference if our chances went from 1/3 to 1/2 if either way we didn’t know what was behind the door we chose? Honestly, it didn’t bother me that much. As was stated multiple times in class, scientists are often wrong, and I rarely understand what happens in science anyway so this wasn’t anything new. I’d never be introduced to this problem in the real world, anyway. This was, until I was scrolling on Facebook and saw this video…

I watched it again, and again and again, until finally it just clicked. Our intuition is lousy. Humans are naturally wrong most of the time, if given a second chance, take it. I’m hoping to provide a bit more of an explanation, since now I find it intriguing.

The Monty Hall problem arose from a game show, hosted by Monty Hall called “Lets Make A Deal”. Here, the contestants were faces with the dilemma of the “three door problem.” This argument began in 1991 and its debate still continues today.

Essentially, the Monty hall problem is a statistics puzzle, not necessarily science. In the beginning, your odds are 50/50, but after eliminating another door, your odds turn to 1/3 and 2/3. This concept is still hard for me to understand, so I prefer the example the video gave: If you have 50 doors and you choose 1, but the host eliminates 48 others, the chances you picked the right door are 1/50, but the chances that the single door you didn’t choose is the right door is 48/50.

Still confusing? Try playing the game. Try adjusting the number of doors as well, maybe to 10, 20, or 50 to truly understand why this problem works. This website provides substantial information about the problem as well– You may want to continue reading the explanation posed, but I will do my best to explain furthermore.

So why is it we have such a hard time accepting this idea? The biggest flaw with this is our basic human misconception, that is, assuming that “two choices means 50/50”. We cannot seem to get past this idea. Two choices are only equal when you know nothing about the other. In the Monty Hall case, you know nothing about your first pick, but when you are given a second choice, you know all your other options are eliminated, filtered out. Basically, the more you know, the better you will be at making the correct decision. Of course, this idea is not perfect, its just a general statistic.

This chapter went into great depth about the problem, describing how our standard vision blocks intuition, the flaw that comes along with this paradox is humans basic intuition, and that we are stubborn and cannot accept the idea of Monty’s filtering into account, refusing to accept that the chances are after others are eliminated.

For some reason, this idea still leaves me with lingering doubt and slight uncertainty. I supposed I am just not satisfied enough with the results and explanation provided, and maybe I am just another stubborn human who refuses to fully accept the concept, but there must be others. I would like to see data stating how many people understand this concept, how many don’t understand it at all, and how many are like me and understand the statistics behind it but are just too stubborn to accept the reality of this problem. I would like more research done behind the psychology of the Monty Hall problem, and if there is a certain section of our brain that deals with this type of statistic.

Maybe this just means I should never go on a game show.