Scientific results...

Okay, possibly not all that scientific. I have no idea how many people I'd have to hear from to have this be totally scientific. But I got about fifty responses, and I figure that's worth something.

First, the context:

I had to get a random number from random.org recently, as you know. I plugged in "1" for the minimum number, and "9" for the maximum.

The system thought for a minute, and then spat out "5."

Now, I didn't say anything at the time of the giveaway, but that kind of bugged me. I was worried that the number-selection process wasn't truly random at all.

The reason I thought that is that if you asked me to name a number between 1 and 9, 5 would be the one I'd pick. It's perfect -- almost exactly in the middle. So getting that as an answer just seemed too tidy to be truly random.

But I went ahead and posted it with due fanfare.

Then I found that I couldn't resist going back to the site and trying again.

It coughed up 5 again.

Now, I live with a complete math/computer nerd. (If you've read my writing, you know that's one of the highest compliments I can pay.) This is someone who gets all excited on Christmas day if I manage to find him a book about statistics that he's never heard of.

I've learned a little through osmosis. I know that the chances of such a system picking the same number twice in a row really aren't that bad, given such a small range.

But what if this system just always gives you a mid-range number? That hardly seemed fair.

I tried again immediately with the same range, and was relieved to receive a 2.

But what if it only gave me that to throw me off the scent, and would go back to blithely tossing out 5s to all the other people who asked for a number between 1 and 9?

I mentioned all this to Professor Nerd of the Nerdology Institute. He shook his head when I mentioned the bit about how 5 just seemed like the number to pick with that kind of range. It seemed like the number a person would choose, and here the computer had come up with it twice.

Here's the thing. He didn't say, "I've read gajillions of books about statistics, numbers, and mentalists. The fact is, if you ask people for, say, a number between one and nine, they won't pick one, and they won't pick nine. People tend to steer clear of the extremes. They also won't pick five. It's right in the middle, and for some reason, that makes them feel as if 5 is somehow an official number in this little system. It's already got a job, as it were. So those three numbers right there are ruled out. So what do they have left? They have the series 2, 3, 4, and the series 6, 7, 8. Now, here's the funny thing -- if you ask people to pick a number between 1 and 5, they'll almost always pick 3. In a smaller series like that, they'll aim for the middle. So, with the numbers left to choose between 1 and 9, they'll tend to pick the middle number of one of those series' I mentioned. In other words, 3 or 7. But mostly 7, because people like higher numbers better than lower ones with a range like this. Low numbers feel weak. High numbers seem stronger."

Okay, he did say that. But not right away. At first, he just said, "No, I don't think so. I think most people would say 7 if you asked them."

So I went ahead and started asking. And then he gave me all the evidence.

Here's the thing, though. He found a chapter in a book by a famous mentalist about exactly this kind of thing. It said that 3 and 7 are the most common numbers people will pick. I believe it mentioned the math explanation I quoted above.

But it didn't mention the fact that, in our society, 3 and 7 are significant numbers. The Trinity, trilogies, best out of three, lucky 7.

If people pick, say, 7, are their minds doing the kind of math mentioned above, or are they just drawn to 7 because as a group we consider it an important number?

And what did people pick in my little unofficial survey, anyway?

My husband was right about one thing. 7 was the favorite pick by a landslide, at 18 votes.

Interestingly, people are apparently drawn toward 7 against their will. One voter told me that she was surprised by her own choice, because "I hate the number 7!"

That's another thing. Not everyone has a favorite number -- or a number that they dislike -- but I don't think anyone reading this feels particularly surprised at the idea of someone having a preference one way or the other. Where does that come from? Numbers are just numbers, handy and occasionally interesting symbols we use -- and yet we can have emotional responses to them. Plenty of people probably have a number they consider a favorite.

Does it work with letters, too? Do people love the letter J, or hate Ps with a passion?

Getting back to the survey: My husband was surprised at how many people chose 9. He didn't expect anyone to, but it got five votes. Its mirror extreme, 1, got no votes at all, which interested both of us.

Even more surprising was how well 8 did. It got 11 votes, putting it solidly in second place.

3 did fairly well, at 5 votes. 2, appropriately, got a couple of votes; 4 got three, as did 6.

And 5? The number that I figured everyone would just naturally gravitate toward, since it's the strong (almost) center of the range?

One vote. Out of almost fifty.

Usually I like to feel like I'm a little different from the crowd, but this kind of depressed me. And not just because I didn't come anywhere near being right in this unofficial bet my husband and I had going.

I think it's because the reason I would choose 5 under the circumstances is that I'm a different kind of nerd. The dorky kind. I like this kind of thing tidy and orderly. 5 divvies the number line up neatly. It's an easy number to count by. It's the number to pick if you and a friend went to random.org and decided to place bets on numbers between 1 and 9, with whoever getting closest to the random number generated winning the pot.

I'm also disturbed because this seems to explain to me why I'm a good writer and a lousy marketer. People appreciate the passion I put into the writing, but they don't necessarily buy my product. And that's because I have a really hard time understanding how to appeal to them in a marketing sense.

I'm probably high on the autism spectrum. Autism runs in my family. I didn't talk until I was almost 5, but I was reading well before that. And even when I started to talk, I did it badly. My vocabulary was great, but my pronunciation and, more importantly, my social skills reeked. It's taken me years to figure out conversational arts like asking the other person how they are, and not going on for hours at a time on whatever subject is compelling my interest on that day, and not telling people that they're just plain wrong even if they are. (If you don't have to tell them, don't bother; if you do, pretty it up a bit. You already knew that. It took me decades of listening to people talk as if I were studying chess games, and I still screw up more often than not.)

I'm a social nerd, because I don't understand why the just-plain truth often isn't what people want to hear. Take trying to sell the magazine. People don't want me to explain that the cost per issue is not unreasonable when you factor in expenses, pages per issue, and the fact that it only comes out once every three months. They want, quite reasonably, for me to make them feel as if they're getting a bargain. Everyone wants that. They want me to appeal to their sensibilities.

People aren't logical. They're people. They like 7s. (Or sometimes hate them.) And, clunky and clueless, I just keep running around trying to explain why 5 is a good, true number.

What a dork.

To everyone who voted: Thank you! This analysis was fascinating.

And to everyone who voted 8, 9, and 2: Thanks for messing up my husband's theory! I sincerely appreciate it.