A Measure of Civility

by

John C. Ashton, S.E., P.E.

August 2013

Abstract: This paper describes a statistical study, conducted in the Chicago area through
Craigslist, to measure civility among a given population subset (single women in this case). The
results are correlated to various demographic factors to determine what parameter, if any, is most
useful in predicting how civilized an individual’s behavior will be.

Introduction

Obviously, for any given social situation, or any situation in general, the response to that
situation will vary from one individual to the next. In fact, there are an infinite number of
possible responses to any given situation. However, certain responses will always be more
socially acceptable than other responses. Even across cultures, certain responses will be deemed
acceptable human behavior and others will not. But confining consideration to a given culture, it
is patent that certain responses will be considered generally acceptable or civilized behavior,
while the others will not be. The number of possible civilized responses may be significant
(even astronomical), as many options exist for responding to any social situation. However,
given a finite number of choices, and provided that the choices are suitably distinct, one of the
choices should always be more socially acceptable than the others.

Thus, a civilized individual, at least according to that society’s standards, should always choose a
specific response when given a finite number of sufficiently different options. To phrase it more
simply, if a civilized individual is posed with a hypothetical situation, and is given 4 possible
options to choose from, of which 3 are not considered socially acceptable, but the fourth option
is generally considered to be civilized behavior, then that individual should always be able to
recognize and choose the fourth option. But is there any way to predict whether an individual is
civilized, other than by testing with hypothetical questions? Are there demographic factors that
will accurately predict civility?

Experimental Setup

A series of 18 multiple-choice questions was prepared, and a subset population was chosen for
evaluation. As described above, the questions were designed to measure civility, by providing 3
uncivilized options and 1 civilized option. The population chosen was the Chicago metropolitan
area, with the subset for study being single women. The questions were posted on Craigslist
(http://chicago.craigslist.org/) in the personals section of the Chicago version of the website.
Many posts were necessary in order to gather sufficient data, from February 2010 to July 2013.
A nominal prize was offered to provide individuals an incentive to respond. Demographic
information was also collected from the respondents: age, height, weight, and race. Because the
questions were very easy, it was decided not to collect statistical information concerning
educational level, because even an uneducated person would still be able to distinguish between
civilized and uncivilized behavior, simply by virtue of her assimilation within that society.
However, to determine if the individual truly was a member of that society, information was
collected concerning her origins (i.e., whether or not she was a native Chicagoan). In this way,
foreigners could be removed from the statistical analysis, or have their responses studied
separately.

Caveats

It should be noted that no attempt was made to study men, or to compare men and women in
terms of civility (i.e., which is more civilized). This might be an area of further research. And,
as mentioned above, only the Chicago area was studied. Further experiments might be
conducted in other urban areas (other large cities) and also in rural areas to determine if
responses significantly differ. For example, perhaps downstate Illinois is more civilized than the
Chicago area, or vice versa. Perhaps New York City or Los Angeles are more civilized than
Chicago, or vice versa. Perhaps Europeans are more or less civilized than Americans (whether
the Americans be Chicagoans or not); this can only be determined through further
experimentation.

To provide a convenient forum for the testing, the Craigslist personals section was utilized. So
by default, responses came from the subset population of single women. As it was necessary to
specify the poster’s (i.e., author’s) age (mid-thirties), it was natural to expect the respondents to
be approximately that age, ranging from their twenties to their forties. This is not unreasonable,
or undesirable, as most singles (the subset population being examined) are within this range.

Test Questions

The test verbiage is presented below, as posted on Craigslist. Note that question 13 is not a
hypothetical situation, but is rather more like a control question. Also note that the correct
answer is always “D”, even for question 13; this simplified the grading. Because the test is so
easy, it was assumed that an individual would not have to resort to blind guessing, and thus
recognition of any answer pattern (e.g., always “D”) would not be particularly significant. Also,
in some of the Craigslist posts (experiment trials) the last 3 questions were presented as extra
credit rather than numbers 16 through 18. Again, it is assumed that this had no significant effect
on the responses; the test was still graded out of 18 (e.g., 15 correct base answers and 3 correct
extra credit would give a score of 100%, not 120%).

TEST

Choose the answer that is most nearly correct. Email with answers (e.g., 1=A, 2=B, 3=D, etc.).
Also include the following information for statistical purposes: age, race, height, weight, and
whether or not you are a native Chicagoan. If you achieve a passing score you will win a date
with me. Good luck!

1. A personal acquaintance sends you an email, requesting a reply. A timely manner for
that reply would be:
a. Never; this is America, so you are not obligated to anyone for anything.
b. A year; he’ll just have to wait until it’s convenient for you.
c. Two months; you’re a very busy woman.
d. A few days, or a week at the outside.

2. You are on a date with a man, and in your opinion, it has been mediocre at best. At the
end of the date he asks for your honest assessment of him. You should:
a. Lie and tell him what you think he wants to hear; it’s opposite’s day so when he
says he wants the truth, he really means the opposite.
b. Say you need to use the restroom and sneak out the back door of the restaurant.
c. Say you need to sleep on it, and swear by all that’s holy that you’ll call him the
next day with your answer, never really intending to do so.
d. Tell him the truth, in as tactful and diplomatic a way as you can.

3. A business acquaintance sends you an email, requesting a reply. A timely manner for
that reply would be:
a. Never; this is America, so you are not obligated to anyone for anything.
b. Six months; he’ll just have to wait until it’s convenient for you.
c. A month; you’re a very busy woman.
d. 24 to 48 hours.

4. You find a letter on the street just outside a mailbox. It obviously bounced off the
mailbox lid instead of dropping in the slot; the foot traffic of passers-by has dislodged the
envelope flap, which was loosely sealed to begin with. Inside you find a birthday card
addressed to little Timmy, along with a brand new 50-dollar bill. You should:
a. Throw away the card and keep the money; Timmy doesn’t deserve it anyway.
b. Keep the money, then track down the sender from the return address and berate
him for sending cash by mail.
c. Keep both the money and the card; you can reuse the card for your nephew’s
birthday by employing a little white-out.
d. Reseal the envelope and put it in the mailbox.

5. A personal acquaintance leaves you a voicemail, requesting a return call. A timely

manner for that reply would be:
a. Never; this is America, so you are not obligated to anyone for anything.
b. Ten years; maybe he’ll forget about it in the meantime.
c. Two months; you never really liked him much anyway.
d. 24 to 48 hours.

6. A casual acquaintance gives you a birthday present. You should:

a. Tell him he’s a jerk and that you hope he gets cancer and dies; it makes you look
bad that he remembered your birthday but you were oblivious to his.
b. Open the present, and if you like it, keep it; otherwise, you throw it in the trash.
c. Immediately throw it in the trash, unopened.
d. Thank him for the present, reminding him that it really isn’t necessary in the
future, as your relationship isn’t close enough to warrant gift exchanges.
7. A business acquaintance leaves you a voicemail, requesting a return call. A timely
manner for that reply would be:
a. Never; this is America, so you are not obligated to anyone for anything.
b. A year; maybe he’ll forget about it in the meantime.
c. A month; if it’s really important he can call again.
d. 24 hours.

8. You agreed to go on a date with a man, but are now having second thoughts. You
should:
a. Stand him up; he’ll get over it.
b. Wait until an hour before the date, and then call to cancel with the most elaborate
excuse you can dream up.
c. Show up half an hour late so he’ll realize you’re not interested in him anymore.
d. Honor your commitment and go on the date.

9. You feel rather inadequate because a coworker is so honest, courteous, and attentive to
detail. You should:
a. Fabricate a sexual harassment charge to try to get him fired.
b. Plant drugs in his office to try to get him fired.
c. Convince your office girlfriends to ostracize him (no acknowledgements in the
elevator, no interaction unless an absolute necessity due to business activity, etc).
d. Try to learn from his example to become a better person.

10. You are considering breaking up with the man you are dating. You and he meet to
discuss your difficulties, and he suggests that you keep seeing each other on a limited
basis (lunch every other week) to try to work through things. He asks you if that seems
reasonable, and you say “yes”. You should:
a. Never see him again; when you said the suggestion sounded reasonable, you were
not assenting to anything, just making a generic (theoretical) observation.
b. Never see him again; he knows that you really meant “no” when you said “yes”.
c. Cancel an hour before your next scheduled lunch with the most elaborate excuse
you can dream up (preferably involving some medical emergency).
d. Keep your word and meet him in two weeks for lunch.

11. You are away at college (out-of-state) when your grandfather dies. Your parents conceal
this fact from you for three months until the end of your term, so as not to distract you
from your studies. This is:
a. Completely honest behavior.
b. Behavior worthy of a saint.
c. Too far-fetched; nothing like that could ever happen in real life.
d. An example of a lie of omission.

12. A man you have never seen before gets into the elevator with you and says “good
morning” and smiles. You should:
a. Go ballistic and start screaming at him; he is obviously hitting on you and only
sees you as a sexual object.
b. Challenge him to a duel to the death (flintlock pistols at dawn); that is the only
way to preserve your honor.
c. Ask him a lot of personal questions to determine if he is a terrorist planning to
bomb your building.
d. Smile and say “good morning” also.

13. Women are:

a. The greatest danger this nation has ever faced.
b. Inherently inferior to men at subjects like math and science.
c. Inherently slutty and, in fact, fundamentally evil.
d. More likely than men to perceive issues in shades of grey rather than black and
white.

14. You have a romantic rival, with whom you are vying for the affections of a certain
gentleman. You should:
a. Throw hydrochloric acid in her face so she will be permanently disfigured.
b. Make a withdrawal from your 401(k) account to hire a mafia hitman to rub
her out (you have plenty of Italian friends).
c. Wait until she is standing at a street corner, and then push her out into traffic so
that she gets run over by a city bus.
d. Rely on the good, sweet, and selfless nature of your personality to eventually
convince the gentleman to decide in your favor.

15. You walk up to a bus stop, where you see a man you consider attractive. You should:
a. Put on a show for him; he expects you to flirt with him, and enjoys not knowing
how far you’ll go with it.
b. Make all sorts of promises to him; he expects you to say “yes” when you mean
“no”.
c. Bewitch him so that he can neither walk away nor run; in essence you want him
“under the gun”.
d. Treat him with the same courtesy and respect that you would accord a man you
did not consider attractive.

16. You and the man you are dating are in your apartment, watching a movie on TV. He asks
you politely for a glass of water. You should:
a. Get your gold-plated snub-nose .32 out of a drawer and shoot him; that is the only
way to free him from his unholy thirst.
b. Spit in his face; that is the only water you’ll give him, and he’ll have to content
himself with it.
c. Tell him to get his own goddamn water; it’s in the kitchen, just a few steps away.
d. Go into your kitchen and get him a glass of water; after all, it is the essence of
life.
17. You are standing at the station platform, waiting for your train. A passenger who is
waiting nearby you appears to have a heart attack and falls unconscious onto the track
below. Although the tracks are not electrified, a train is approaching rapidly and will run
over the prostrate figure within 90 seconds. You should:
a. Do nothing; you only have to be nice to someone if you actually know him, but
otherwise it is perfectly acceptable to treat people like dirt.
b. Use your phone to take a video of the person being run over by the train, then text
your best friend to tell her you helped reduce the surplus population today.
c. Only assist the person if you can ascertain that he is a True Christian (which may
be difficult since he is unconscious and you only have 90 seconds or so).
d. Use that 90 seconds to get him off the track and out of immediate danger.

18. You are taking out some fruit that has spoiled to throw it in the dumpster. You see a
blind beggar across the street, on the corner. You should:
a. Start throwing the rotten fruit at the man to encourage him to leave your
neighborhood; you live in an exclusive community and won’t put up with any
riffraff.
b. Get some of your neighbors to help you lynch him; he obviously doesn’t deserve
to live.
c. Sneak up behind him and steal his collection tin; it seems like a very funny prank,
and even if he has feelings, they certainly don’t need to be taken into
consideration.
d. Treat him with the same compassion and respect that he would accord you if your
positions were reversed.

A Note on the Methodology

Some may question the validity of the entire premise that civility can be measured with these
questions. Those who are especially concerned with epistemology may argue that it is
impossible to objectively declare one of the answer choices (“A” through “D”) to be correct, or
at least more correct than the other choices; they may feel that any sort of conclusion regarding
civility is entirely subjective, and therefore attempting to quantify it is futile.

This brings to mind an interesting anecdote regarding former Congressman Abner Mikva. The
author of this paper once heard him tell an amusing story about his time in the House of
Representatives, where he served alongside Gerald Ford (who, of course, was not yet Vice-
President). Gerald Ford was leading a campaign to impeach Supreme Court Justice William
Douglas, but it wasn’t gaining much traction. Mikva teased Ford about the vagueness of the
Constitution when it addresses impeachment. What exactly is an impeachable offense? If
someone had enough parking tickets, would that satisfy the requirement of high crimes and
misdemeanors? Ford, clearly annoyed, finally retorted that an impeachable offense was
whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considered it to be. And that is the truth.
That is the most basic definition of a crime, or its opposite, civility. One knows it if one sees it.

Civilized behavior is what a society says it is. Although etiquette books exist, along with advice
columns and the like, it is not necessary to consult hoary scholars to determine if it is civilized or
uncivilized behavior to, for example, trip a little old lady as she crosses the street. The correct
answers to all of the test questions are equally obvious. The test is valid in representing civility
because it passes the most important test itself: its solution is patent to civilized members of
society. That may seem to be circular logic or contrary to the scientific method, but this is one
situation that calls for “thinking outside the box”. If a majority of respondents can identify that
the correct answer is always “D”, then that is truly the correct answer.

Each society defines civilized behavior for itself. If someone has become assimilated in a
society through the process of acculturation (or even by studying that society sufficiently to
become intimately familiar with it), then he or she will be able to instantly recognize civilized
and uncivilized behavior. If that person is uncivilized according to the standards of that society,
or is from a radically different society, then he or she will probably have a lot of difficulty in
making the distinction between civilized and uncivilized behavior.

Predictions

The results are presented in the following section. It was predicted, however, prior to the start of
the experiment, that age would be most closely correlated to success at the civility test. This is
because significant behavioral differences exist between generations (first half gen-X vs. second
half gen-X vs. gen-Y / Millennials), as is widely known. It was predicted that no correlation
would be found between civility and other factors, such as height or race.

Results

The following pages illustrate the experiment results in various formats. First the raw data is
presented, and then the sorted data is presented. The difference is that the first sorted data table
groups respondents from the same race, so that an average grade A (percentage correct on the
test) for that race may be calculated. The average percentage for each race R is plotted as a bar
chart (R vs. A). Likewise, the second sorted data table codes respondents as either native
Chicagoan (C = 1) or non-native (C = 0), so that an average grade O (percentage correct on the
test) for that particular population’s origin may be calculated. The average percentage for each
group’s origin is plotted as a bar chart (C vs. O). The final figures illustrate the correlation, or
lack thereof, between the test percentage P (i.e., the grade) and each of the demographic factors.
Standard linear regression techniques were used to find a line of best fit for the data scatter (age
Y, height H, and weight W). These are plotted as P vs. Y, P vs. H, and P vs. W. It was decided
to include all data points, even those of non-natives, in the linear regression calculations and
graphs. This was because no significant native / non-native difference was seen in the C vs. O
chart; therefore, all respondents may be considered as assimilated Chicagoans.

It should be noted that 60 of the 102 respondents achieved a perfect grade of 100%. Since this is
a clear majority (58.8% of respondents), the test questions are vindicated as indicators of
civilized behavior. Thus, a clear majority of individuals agree on, and thus define for their
society, what constitutes civilized behavior.
Note 1: w for white, b for black, a for asian, h for hispanic, m for middle eastern, n for native american, o for other

Response Score S Test Percentage (%) Age Y Height H Weight W Race Code Average Race Code Native Chicagoan Code Average Origin Code
Number N (# correct) P = 100*S/18 (years) (in.) (lb) R (see note 1) Test Percentage A (%) C (0 = no, 1 = yes) Test Percentage O (%)
1 17 94.44444444 35 64 115 w - 0 - 0
2 18 100 21 64 145 w - 0 - 1
3 18 100 31 68 138 w - 1 - 1
4 18 100 23 64 127 h - 1 - 1
5 17 94.44444444 49 62 115 w - 1 - 0
6 7 38.88888889 28 66 125 w - 1 - 0
7 18 100 23 63 160 o - 1 - 1
8 18 100 32 66 160 w - 1 - 1
9 18 100 36 64 260 o - 0 - 1
10 17 94.44444444 26 63 118 a - 0 - 0
11 18 100 45 62 180 w - 1 - 1
12 18 100 24 70 200 w - 1 - 1
13 17 94.44444444 41 66 148 w - 1 - 0
14 17 94.44444444 25 66 220 w - 0 - 0
15 17 94.44444444 30 66 220 b - 1 - 0
16 18 100 32 65 148 b - 0 - 1
17 16 88.88888889 20 69 270 w - 0 - 0
18 18 100 30 68 145 w - 1 - 1
19 18 100 30 60 115 w - 1 - 1
20 17 94.44444444 52 60 135 w - 0 - 0
21 18 100 29 64 140 w - 1 - 1
22 18 100 26 67 140 b - 1 - 1
23 6 33.33333333 23 68 153 b - 1 - 0
24 18 100 38 71 145 w - 1 - 1
25 18 100 27 61 115 a - 1 - 1
26 11 61.11111111 29 65 125 o - 1 - 0
27 6 33.33333333 20 63 135 a - 0 - 0
28 18 100 38 71 174 w - 1 - 1
29 18 100 20 61 125 w - 0 - 1
30 17 94.44444444 39 64 145 w - 1 - 0
31 18 100 36 68 200 w - 0 - 1
32 6 33.33333333 22 62.5 183 w - 1 - 0
33 6 33.33333333 28 66 140 b - 0 - 0
34 12 66.66666667 25 67 150 w - 1 - 0
35 18 100 32 61 130 a - 0 - 1
36 13 72.22222222 23 64 195 b - 1 - 0
37 18 100 30 60 115 a - 0 - 1
38 18 100 32 70 190 w - 0 - 1
39 18 100 42 61 105 w - 1 - 1
40 18 100 41 68 155 w - 0 - 1
41 18 100 45 64 150 w - 1 - 1
42 14 77.77777778 26 67 145 h - 1 - 0
43 17 94.44444444 22 66 230 b - 1 - 0
44 11 61.11111111 32 71 500 w - 1 - 0
45 16 88.88888889 33 67 230 o - 1 - 0
46 18 100 27 64 130 b - 1 - 1
47 18 100 31 66 120 w - 0 - 1
48 14 77.77777778 37 67 155 o - 0 - 0
49 14 77.77777778 21 64 180 b - 1 - 0
50 17 94.44444444 22 63 135 w - 1 - 0
51 18 100 33 67 160 w - 1 - 1
52 15 83.33333333 33 62 130 a - 0 - 0
53 18 100 28 62 105 w - 0 - 1
54 18 100 21 63 190 w - 0 - 1
55 15 83.33333333 24 62 110 w - 0 - 0
56 18 100 28 65 145 w - 0 - 1
57 17 94.44444444 31 72 358 b - 1 - 0
58 18 100 33 64 125 w - 0 - 1
59 14 77.77777778 36 63 155 w - 0 - 0
60 18 100 49 72 250 w - 0 - 1
61 18 100 30 64 175 w - 1 - 1
62 18 100 31 65 135 w - 0 - 1
63 18 100 34 64 133 w - 1 - 1
64 15 83.33333333 26 66 160 o - 0 - 0
65 18 100 28 67 125 w - 1 - 1
66 16 88.88888889 31 63 170 a - 1 - 0
67 16 88.88888889 20 67 160 h - 1 - 0
68 18 100 24 66 140 w - 1 - 1
69 18 100 23 62 118 b - 1 - 1
70 18 100 21 69 130 b - 1 - 1
71 18 100 32 69 135 b - 1 - 1
72 18 100 48 65 128 w - 1 - 1
73 15 83.33333333 22 64 145 w - 0 - 0
74 17 94.44444444 31 71 160 w - 0 - 0
75 18 100 20 64 130 b - 0 - 1
76 18 100 32 65 150 w - 1 - 1
77 18 100 32 66 210 b - 1 - 1
78 18 100 29 62 125 w - 1 - 1
79 17 94.44444444 23 65 110 a - 1 - 0
80 17 94.44444444 23 65 125 w - 0 - 0
81 18 100 32 67 192 h - 1 - 1
82 18 100 18 60 130 h - 0 - 1
83 18 100 28 64 150 w - 0 - 1
84 17 94.44444444 23 63 145 b - 1 - 0
85 17 94.44444444 31 62 123 w - 0 - 0
86 18 100 51 64 120 w - 1 - 1
87 16 88.88888889 34 67 175 w - 1 - 0
88 16 88.88888889 44 67 130 o - 0 - 0
89 0 0 24 66 155 w - 0 - 0
90 18 100 35 64 130 a - 0 - 1
91 18 100 27 62 108 w - 1 - 1
92 17 94.44444444 34 65 147 b - 0 - 0
93 18 100 34 64 165 a - 1 - 1
94 18 100 35 64 150 h - 1 - 1
95 18 100 28 70 180 w - 1 - 1
96 18 100 23 65 123 w - 1 - 1
97 18 100 30 68 165 w - 1 - 1
98 18 100 36 64 185 w - 0 - 1
99 18 100 34 68 130 w - 0 - 1
100 18 100 19 63 170 w - 0 - 1
101 18 100 34 72 150 b - 0 - 1
102 15 83.33333333 25 63 150 o - 1 - 0
103 0
104 0
105 0
91.17647059 60
average

statistics Raw Data 8/8/2013

Note 1: w for white, b for black, a for asian, h for hispanic, m for middle eastern, n for native american, o for other

Response Score S Test Percentage (%) Age Y Height H Weight W Race Code Average Race Code Native Chicagoan Code Average Origin Code
Number N (# correct) P = 100*S/18 (years) (in.) (lb) R (see note 1) Test Percentage A (%) C (0 = no, 1 = yes) Test Percentage O (%)
10 17 94.44444444 26 63 118 a 89.44444444 0 -
25 18 100 27 61 115 a 89.44444444 1 -
27 6 33.33333333 20 63 135 a 89.44444444 0 -
35 18 100 32 61 130 a 89.44444444 0 -
37 18 100 30 60 115 a 89.44444444 0 -
52 15 83.33333333 33 62 130 a 89.44444444 0 -
66 16 88.88888889 31 63 170 a 89.44444444 1 -
79 17 94.44444444 23 65 110 a 89.44444444 1 -
90 18 100 35 64 130 a 89.44444444 0 -
93 18 100 34 64 165 a 89.44444444 1 -
15 17 94.44444444 30 66 220 b 88.27160494 1 -
16 18 100 32 65 148 b 88.27160494 0 -
22 18 100 26 67 140 b 88.27160494 1 -
23 6 33.33333333 23 68 153 b 88.27160494 1 -
33 6 33.33333333 28 66 140 b 88.27160494 0 -
36 13 72.22222222 23 64 195 b 88.27160494 1 -
43 17 94.44444444 22 66 230 b 88.27160494 1 -
46 18 100 27 64 130 b 88.27160494 1 -
49 14 77.77777778 21 64 180 b 88.27160494 1 -
57 17 94.44444444 31 72 358 b 88.27160494 1 -
69 18 100 23 62 118 b 88.27160494 1 -
70 18 100 21 69 130 b 88.27160494 1 -
71 18 100 32 69 135 b 88.27160494 1 -
75 18 100 20 64 130 b 88.27160494 0 -
77 18 100 32 66 210 b 88.27160494 1 -
84 17 94.44444444 23 63 145 b 88.27160494 1 -
92 17 94.44444444 34 65 147 b 88.27160494 0 -
101 18 100 34 72 150 b 88.27160494 0 -
4 18 100 23 64 127 h 94.44444444 1 -
42 14 77.77777778 26 67 145 h 94.44444444 1 -
67 16 88.88888889 20 67 160 h 94.44444444 1 -
81 18 100 32 67 192 h 94.44444444 1 -
82 18 100 18 60 130 h 94.44444444 0 -
94 18 100 35 64 150 h 94.44444444 1 -
7 18 100 23 63 160 o 85.41666667 1 -
9 18 100 36 64 260 o 85.41666667 0 -
26 11 61.11111111 29 65 125 o 85.41666667 1 -
45 16 88.88888889 33 67 230 o 85.41666667 1 -
48 14 77.77777778 37 67 155 o 85.41666667 0 -
64 15 83.33333333 26 66 160 o 85.41666667 0 -
88 16 88.88888889 44 67 130 o 85.41666667 0 -
102 15 83.33333333 25 63 150 o 85.41666667 1 -
1 17 94.44444444 35 64 115 w 92.77777778 0 -
2 18 100 21 64 145 w 92.77777778 0 -
3 18 100 31 68 138 w 92.77777778 1 -
5 17 94.44444444 49 62 115 w 92.77777778 1 -
6 7 38.88888889 28 66 125 w 92.77777778 1 -
8 18 100 32 66 160 w 92.77777778 1 -
11 18 100 45 62 180 w 92.77777778 1 -
12 18 100 24 70 200 w 92.77777778 1 -
13 17 94.44444444 41 66 148 w 92.77777778 1 -
14 17 94.44444444 25 66 220 w 92.77777778 0 -
17 16 88.88888889 20 69 270 w 92.77777778 0 -
18 18 100 30 68 145 w 92.77777778 1 -
19 18 100 30 60 115 w 92.77777778 1 -
20 17 94.44444444 52 60 135 w 92.77777778 0 -
21 18 100 29 64 140 w 92.77777778 1 -
24 18 100 38 71 145 w 92.77777778 1 -
28 18 100 38 71 174 w 92.77777778 1 -
29 18 100 20 61 125 w 92.77777778 0 -
30 17 94.44444444 39 64 145 w 92.77777778 1 -
31 18 100 36 68 200 w 92.77777778 0 -
32 6 33.33333333 22 62.5 183 w 92.77777778 1 -
34 12 66.66666667 25 67 150 w 92.77777778 1 -
38 18 100 32 70 190 w 92.77777778 0 -
39 18 100 42 61 105 w 92.77777778 1 -
40 18 100 41 68 155 w 92.77777778 0 -
41 18 100 45 64 150 w 92.77777778 1 -
44 11 61.11111111 32 71 500 w 92.77777778 1 -
47 18 100 31 66 120 w 92.77777778 0 -
50 17 94.44444444 22 63 135 w 92.77777778 1 -
51 18 100 33 67 160 w 92.77777778 1 -
53 18 100 28 62 105 w 92.77777778 0 -
54 18 100 21 63 190 w 92.77777778 0 -
55 15 83.33333333 24 62 110 w 92.77777778 0 -
56 18 100 28 65 145 w 92.77777778 0 -
58 18 100 33 64 125 w 92.77777778 0 -
59 14 77.77777778 36 63 155 w 92.77777778 0 -
60 18 100 49 72 250 w 92.77777778 0 -
61 18 100 30 64 175 w 92.77777778 1 -
62 18 100 31 65 135 w 92.77777778 0 -
63 18 100 34 64 133 w 92.77777778 1 -
65 18 100 28 67 125 w 92.77777778 1 -
68 18 100 24 66 140 w 92.77777778 1 -
72 18 100 48 65 128 w 92.77777778 1 -
73 15 83.33333333 22 64 145 w 92.77777778 0 -
74 17 94.44444444 31 71 160 w 92.77777778 0 -
76 18 100 32 65 150 w 92.77777778 1 -
78 18 100 29 62 125 w 92.77777778 1 -
80 17 94.44444444 23 65 125 w 92.77777778 0 -
83 18 100 28 64 150 w 92.77777778 0 -
85 17 94.44444444 31 62 123 w 92.77777778 0 -
86 18 100 51 64 120 w 92.77777778 1 -
87 16 88.88888889 34 67 175 w 92.77777778 1 -
89 0 0 24 66 155 w 92.77777778 0 -
91 18 100 27 62 108 w 92.77777778 1 -
95 18 100 28 70 180 w 92.77777778 1 -
96 18 100 23 65 123 w 92.77777778 1 -
97 18 100 30 68 165 w 92.77777778 1 -
98 18 100 36 64 185 w 92.77777778 0 -
99 18 100 34 68 130 w 92.77777778 0 -
100 18 100 19 63 170 w 92.77777778 0 -
103
104
105

statistics Sorted Data for Race 8/8/2013

Note 1: w for white, b for black, a for asian, h for hispanic, m for middle eastern, n for native american, o for other

Response Score S Test Percentage (%) Age Y Height H Weight W Race Code Average Race Code Native Chicagoan Code Average Origin Code
Number N (# correct) P = 100*S/18 (years) (in.) (lb) R (see note 1) Test Percentage A (%) C (0 = no, 1 = yes) Test Percentage O (%)
1 17 94.44444444 35 64 115 w - 0 90.43927649
2 18 100 21 64 145 w - 0 90.43927649
9 18 100 36 64 260 o - 0 90.43927649
10 17 94.44444444 26 63 118 a - 0 90.43927649
14 17 94.44444444 25 66 220 w - 0 90.43927649
16 18 100 32 65 148 b - 0 90.43927649
17 16 88.88888889 20 69 270 w - 0 90.43927649
20 17 94.44444444 52 60 135 w - 0 90.43927649
27 6 33.33333333 20 63 135 a - 0 90.43927649
29 18 100 20 61 125 w - 0 90.43927649
31 18 100 36 68 200 w - 0 90.43927649
33 6 33.33333333 28 66 140 b - 0 90.43927649
35 18 100 32 61 130 a - 0 90.43927649
37 18 100 30 60 115 a - 0 90.43927649
38 18 100 32 70 190 w - 0 90.43927649
40 18 100 41 68 155 w - 0 90.43927649
47 18 100 31 66 120 w - 0 90.43927649
48 14 77.77777778 37 67 155 o - 0 90.43927649
52 15 83.33333333 33 62 130 a - 0 90.43927649
53 18 100 28 62 105 w - 0 90.43927649
54 18 100 21 63 190 w - 0 90.43927649
55 15 83.33333333 24 62 110 w - 0 90.43927649
56 18 100 28 65 145 w - 0 90.43927649
58 18 100 33 64 125 w - 0 90.43927649
59 14 77.77777778 36 63 155 w - 0 90.43927649
60 18 100 49 72 250 w - 0 90.43927649
62 18 100 31 65 135 w - 0 90.43927649
64 15 83.33333333 26 66 160 o - 0 90.43927649
73 15 83.33333333 22 64 145 w - 0 90.43927649
74 17 94.44444444 31 71 160 w - 0 90.43927649
75 18 100 20 64 130 b - 0 90.43927649
80 17 94.44444444 23 65 125 w - 0 90.43927649
82 18 100 18 60 130 h - 0 90.43927649
83 18 100 28 64 150 w - 0 90.43927649
85 17 94.44444444 31 62 123 w - 0 90.43927649
88 16 88.88888889 44 67 130 o - 0 90.43927649
89 0 0 24 66 155 w - 0 90.43927649
90 18 100 35 64 130 a - 0 90.43927649
92 17 94.44444444 34 65 147 b - 0 90.43927649
98 18 100 36 64 185 w - 0 90.43927649
99 18 100 34 68 130 w - 0 90.43927649
100 18 100 19 63 170 w - 0 90.43927649
101 18 100 34 72 150 b - 0 90.43927649
3 18 100 31 68 138 w - 1 91.71374765
4 18 100 23 64 127 h - 1 91.71374765
5 17 94.44444444 49 62 115 w - 1 91.71374765
6 7 38.88888889 28 66 125 w - 1 91.71374765
7 18 100 23 63 160 o - 1 91.71374765
8 18 100 32 66 160 w - 1 91.71374765
11 18 100 45 62 180 w - 1 91.71374765
12 18 100 24 70 200 w - 1 91.71374765
13 17 94.44444444 41 66 148 w - 1 91.71374765
15 17 94.44444444 30 66 220 b - 1 91.71374765
18 18 100 30 68 145 w - 1 91.71374765
19 18 100 30 60 115 w - 1 91.71374765
21 18 100 29 64 140 w - 1 91.71374765
22 18 100 26 67 140 b - 1 91.71374765
23 6 33.33333333 23 68 153 b - 1 91.71374765
24 18 100 38 71 145 w - 1 91.71374765
25 18 100 27 61 115 a - 1 91.71374765
26 11 61.11111111 29 65 125 o - 1 91.71374765
28 18 100 38 71 174 w - 1 91.71374765
30 17 94.44444444 39 64 145 w - 1 91.71374765
32 6 33.33333333 22 62.5 183 w - 1 91.71374765
34 12 66.66666667 25 67 150 w - 1 91.71374765
36 13 72.22222222 23 64 195 b - 1 91.71374765
39 18 100 42 61 105 w - 1 91.71374765
41 18 100 45 64 150 w - 1 91.71374765
42 14 77.77777778 26 67 145 h - 1 91.71374765
43 17 94.44444444 22 66 230 b - 1 91.71374765
44 11 61.11111111 32 71 500 w - 1 91.71374765
45 16 88.88888889 33 67 230 o - 1 91.71374765
46 18 100 27 64 130 b - 1 91.71374765
49 14 77.77777778 21 64 180 b - 1 91.71374765
50 17 94.44444444 22 63 135 w - 1 91.71374765
51 18 100 33 67 160 w - 1 91.71374765
57 17 94.44444444 31 72 358 b - 1 91.71374765
61 18 100 30 64 175 w - 1 91.71374765
63 18 100 34 64 133 w - 1 91.71374765
65 18 100 28 67 125 w - 1 91.71374765
66 16 88.88888889 31 63 170 a - 1 91.71374765
67 16 88.88888889 20 67 160 h - 1 91.71374765
68 18 100 24 66 140 w - 1 91.71374765
69 18 100 23 62 118 b - 1 91.71374765
70 18 100 21 69 130 b - 1 91.71374765
71 18 100 32 69 135 b - 1 91.71374765
72 18 100 48 65 128 w - 1 91.71374765
76 18 100 32 65 150 w - 1 91.71374765
77 18 100 32 66 210 b - 1 91.71374765
78 18 100 29 62 125 w - 1 91.71374765
79 17 94.44444444 23 65 110 a - 1 91.71374765
81 18 100 32 67 192 h - 1 91.71374765
84 17 94.44444444 23 63 145 b - 1 91.71374765
86 18 100 51 64 120 w - 1 91.71374765
87 16 88.88888889 34 67 175 w - 1 91.71374765
91 18 100 27 62 108 w - 1 91.71374765
93 18 100 34 64 165 a - 1 91.71374765
94 18 100 35 64 150 h - 1 91.71374765
95 18 100 28 70 180 w - 1 91.71374765
96 18 100 23 65 123 w - 1 91.71374765
97 18 100 30 68 165 w - 1 91.71374765
102 15 83.33333333 25 63 150 o - 1 91.71374765
103
104
105

statistics Sorted Data for Origin 8/8/2013

Grade vs. Height
74
72
70
Height H (in.)

68
66
y = ‐0.0063x + 65.774
64
62
60
58
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Grade P (%)

Grade vs. Weight
600

500
Weight W (lb)

400

300

200 y = ‐0.3204x + 186.51

100

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Grade P (%)

Grade vs. Age
60

50
Age Y (years)

40

30

20 y = 0.0972x + 21.375

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Grade P (%)

statistics Graphs 8/8/2013

Race Code R vs. Average Grade A (%)
96
94
92
90
88
86
84
82
80
a a a a b b b b b b h h o o wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Chi. Code C vs. Average Grade O (%)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
000000000000000000000011111111111111111111111111111

statistics Graphs 8/8/2013

Conclusions

The average grade for all respondents was 91.2%. The average grade was 89.4% for Asians,
88.3% for blacks, 94.4% for Hispanics, 85.4% for other / mixed races, and 92.8% for whites.
While Hispanics and whites seemed to score slightly better than Asians and blacks, the
differences between the groups only amount to a few percentage points and don’t seem to be
statistically significant. Thus, civility does not seem closely correlated with racial group.

The average grade was 90.4% for non-natives of the Chicagoland area and 91.7% for natives of
the Chicagoland area. Thus, as previously mentioned, there is no significant difference due to
origin; all respondents may be considered as assimilated Chicagoans.

The linear regression equation for the grade vs. height graph is nearly a horizontal line. Visually,
there is also no clear trend in the data. Thus, as predicted, height does not correlate with civility.

The linear regression equation for the grade vs. weight graph is a relatively horizontal line,
although it does slope slightly downward, indicating that lighter people achieve better civility
scores on average. Visually, however, the trend seems to be in the other direction; discounting
some outliers in the data, heavier people’s scores appear clustered at the higher end of the
spectrum. Put another way, a curve defining the upper limits of the data appears to loosely
approach an asymptote corresponding to a perfect grade of 100%. This might be explainable by
considering the impediments to social interaction that are presented by obesity. If one is a “jerk”
(i.e., uncivilized) and obese as well, one will likely be shunned or at least avoided by other
members of society except when absolutely necessary (e.g., unavoidable business transactions),
and thus it will be quite difficult for one to get by in the world. In other words, thinner people
have more flexibility in their behavior and can get away with less civilized behavior because
they are more “attractive” to other members of society. In fact, even the data outliers can be
explained by considering that extreme obesity might pose such an impediment that the individual
would not care about or even attempt social interaction any longer, thus depressing the civility
scores. But, since the linear regression is at odds with this analysis, it is perhaps best to conclude
that there is no obvious correlation between weight and civility.

Finally, the linear regression equation for the grade vs. age graph is an upward sloping line,
indicating that older people achieve better civility scores on average. This is also borne out by a
visual examination of the graph; a curve defining the upper limits of the data appears to approach
an asymptote corresponding to a perfect grade of 100%. This is much more pronounced here
than the apparent curve in the grade vs. weight graph, which was actually at odds with the
statistical regression line. Thus, with some confidence, it can be said that age does correlate with
civility. This is not to say that younger people are all uncivilized, but rather that there is more
variability in their behavior. For instance, the 20 to 30 year age bracket has grades ranging from
0% to 100%, but the 30 to 40 year age bracket has grades that are much more narrowly defined,
from about 60% to 100%, and the 40+ year age bracket has only grades of about 90% and better.
This supports the original prediction that age would correlate with civility. However, because of
the data scatter, there is no way to conclude whether this is primarily a function of generational
differences (different ages answer test questions differently according to their “bracket”) rather
than acquired life experiences / life skills (civility scores increase year by year as one ages).