Good point. I intended “compared to the counterfactual” to be implicit throughout this article, as that’s really what “impact” should always mean. I also briefly alluded to it in saying “such as harms from someone less qualified being interviewed”.
But it’s true that many people don’t naturally interpret “impact” as “compared to the counterfactual”, and that it’s often worth highlighting explicitly that that’s the relevant comparison.
To address that, I’ve now sprinkled in a few mentions of “compared to the counterfactual”. Thanks for highlighting this :)
Good point. I intended “compared to the counterfactual” to be implicit throughout this article, as that’s really what “impact” should always mean. I also briefly alluded to it in saying “such as harms from someone less qualified being interviewed”.
But it’s true that many people don’t naturally interpret “impact” as “compared to the counterfactual”, and that it’s often worth highlighting explicitly that that’s the relevant comparison.
To address that, I’ve now sprinkled in a few mentions of “compared to the counterfactual”. Thanks for highlighting this :)