Michael Agger, Slate senior editor, discusses the Ohio-based company Achievement Metrics and their use of speech analysis on NFL draft prospects. They use speech analysis to look for specific traits and compare similar players by correlating certain traits with future performance. Achievement Metrics grew out of a company called Social Science Automation, which does most of its work for the United States government.

Comments [8]
Lenny, your first 2 guests have related subject matter. Regarding the test given to football players to analyze their future performance. Let’s apply this to our corporate CEOs and government leaders, Maybe we could predict from their conversation and choice of words, if they will proceed to be predators on society to reap billions off the backs of the rest of the population, or do they have any sense of affiliation, cooperation, or responsibility to the society and rest of us. Give this test to our candidates for president, congress and the court! Then use the results to weed out the irresponsible and greedy, as Jeff Madrick was talking about. Touchdowns are nice, but saving our economy is also even nicer.
... could use this incredible technology in Williamsburg to help determine who will become the next hot, aging hipster skateboarder!!
Valuable stuff!
@ dboy
um, I find this pretty fascinating.
@franco
I don't believe that the use of "um" has a direct correlation with intelligence (though possibly background). It is often related to introspection and irresolution.
Who wastes their time and brain cells on this stuff???
Simple question: what is Achievement Metrics success rate overall? Based on what I've heard so far there seems to be more bust than boom.
Isn't this kinda the same thing the previous guest was warning us about??
Mr. Agger's speech is so annoying -- with his uhs, SO, mmm, um, thank God he's not up for a job at the NFL. If "speech" is an indication of education/background... Mr. Agger is in BIG TROUBLE.
troubling: for all of us, not necessarily NFL prospects. "the company" may be "upfront about dealing in probabilities" but that does not stop those who use the data from jumping to broad conclusions without basis. And I can just imagine this data may be associated with a person and carried around forever in this Age of Information...
Leave a Comment
Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.