It seems like you need a lot more context. If Assad were to say he was going to resign in one year, I’d expect him to be out of power far sooner. If David Cameron said the same thing, I’d expect his statement to be fairly accurate.
I’m trying to decide how much of this context is expressed within the value of the prior probability. I have a very low prior on Assad voluntarily resigning. Much higher (relatively speaking) on Cameron.
Hypothetically:
I assign a 40% prior to Smith resigning within the year. I assign a 75% prior to Jones resigning in that same period. Previously, both Smith and Jones denied any intent to resign (incorporated into the prior).
Now, Smith and Jones announce they will step down in 18 months. My intuition is that the reasons why Smith-prior was lower mean that I should adjust less than the Jones prior. Yet if the Smith prior was 10%, I would probably adjust the prior more than I adjust the Jones prior.
That makes my math-error sense tickle, so I’m probably be doing something wrong.
It seems like you need a lot more context. If Assad were to say he was going to resign in one year, I’d expect him to be out of power far sooner. If David Cameron said the same thing, I’d expect his statement to be fairly accurate.
I’m trying to decide how much of this context is expressed within the value of the prior probability. I have a very low prior on Assad voluntarily resigning. Much higher (relatively speaking) on Cameron.
Hypothetically: I assign a 40% prior to Smith resigning within the year. I assign a 75% prior to Jones resigning in that same period. Previously, both Smith and Jones denied any intent to resign (incorporated into the prior).
Now, Smith and Jones announce they will step down in 18 months. My intuition is that the reasons why Smith-prior was lower mean that I should adjust less than the Jones prior. Yet if the Smith prior was 10%, I would probably adjust the prior more than I adjust the Jones prior.
That makes my math-error sense tickle, so I’m probably be doing something wrong.