The first time it was presented it was in the American Statistician a quarterly peer-reviewed scientific journal covering statistics. The other two* they don't say where they were published. She published it in what...Parade Magazine. Is there really any surprise the one read by a large portion of the general public got push back opposed to the other, A PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL.

(edit) *Journal of Economics Perspectives and Bridge Today

Was she getting some push back solely because she was a women? It's possible, but i can't see it based on this video or the linked article. Not that i wouldn't be surprised though. There are always some in the population with biases against different groups of people. Women being one of them.

The reason this confounds people is that they look at it from the wrong end.

Let's say I told you that on this beach, 1 particular grain of sand is actually worth a trillion dollars (and I know which one it is).

I get you to pick a grain of sand. Your odds are trillions to one, right?

Now, after you pick, let's say I remove one more grain and ask you to pick again. Should you switch? eh... your odds are still trillions to one.

But now let's say I removed all other grains of sand EXCEPT one. Which is more likely? That you picked the trillion to one grain, or that I've shown you the correct answer?

Monty Hall problem explained

Everyone should read the comments on the video linked from eric here. This was posted about 10 years ago, and a poor VS user by the name of "enfathom" made the typical error (just as I did), but then dug in on being wrong.

I read those comments to this day, and I still laugh at the whole thread.

Yikes it has 1 decade ago!

I had flashbacks of that video's comments when I saw that this video was about the Monty Hall problem. enfathom never did come back.

/sigh

Yes, she is right.

Yes, anyone who tried to talk down to her because she is a woman is a dickhead.

But seriously?

The math problem that stumped thousands of mansplainers

/facepalm

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Wow - that was a golden oldie from days of yore. ;-)