Politeness Bias in Online Research

Meaningless drivel, no context, no control, no valid information on the actual value of the answers.
Doesn't distinguish between "polite" and "well written"or "succinct".
To be fair I only skim read it, as it was neither well written nor succinct.
Del

"It costs nothing to be polite. Take the risk." _{- Anonymous Poster #0}

I'm not surprised. Hitler was technically factual and competent. But, he wasn't very polite.

"The researchers defined impolite responses by noting the presence of certain terms, such as sentences beginning with second-person pronouns such as “you” and “your,” sentences beginning with a question, and informal references to the questioner such as “dude” and “bud.”"

That seems like a pretty strange definition of impolite to me. Puzzling.

I would think that starting with "you" or "your" indicates a response that is getting straight to the point, so it would grab my attention, personally. You can't beat answers that go straight to it....

Questions from responders, otoh, are often key to being able to answer the OP on CR4. If someone engaged my query seriously enough to want more information or discussion in order to help, I would be pleased.... It certainly wouldn't bias me against the person who asked.

I don't know what to say about 'dude' or 'bud', which afaik are friendly terms. Where I come from 'batbrain', 'dolt', 'idiot' or 'nincompoop' would be a definite rude.

So it's hard to take the results seriously, where rudeness has been judged by a machine on the basis of those criteria.

Well, if someone asks a question and gets an insult, I can believe they likely wouldn't give the reply a GA...