{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029819694868238558, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0020804438280166435, 'mean_word_length': 5.5, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The consistency of the subjective concept of randomness

A pervasive bias in the subjective concept of randomness is that people often expect random sequences to exhibit more alternations than produced by genuine random processes. What is less known is the stability of this bias. Here, we examine two important aspects of the over-alternation bias: first, whether this bias is present in stimuli that vary across feature dimensions, sensory modalities, presentation modes and probing methods, and, second, how consistent the bias is across these stimulus variations. In Experiment 1, participants adjusted sequences until they looked maximally random. The sequences were presented as temporal streams of colors, shapes, auditory tones or tiled as spatial matrices. In Experiment 2, participants produced random matrices by adjusting the color of each cell. We replicated the findings using a within-subjects design in Experiment 3. We found that participants judged and produced over-alternating stimuli as the most random. Importantly, this bias was consistent across presentation modes (temporal vs spatial), feature dimensions (color vs shape), sensory modalities (visual vs auditory), speed (fast vs slow), stimulus size (small vs large matrices) and probing methods (adjusting the generating process vs individual bits). Overall, the results suggest that the subjective concept of randomness is highly stable across stimulus variations.