<p>
You have two apps that could go either way. One app indicates Princeton is his first choice by applying SCEA (I realize it’s not first choice for all, but it is for the vast majority). The other doesn’t. He may have applied to HYS, all schools that cross admits usually choose over Princeton. You don’t think Princeton cares about whether they are a first choice or backup, or that Princeton cares about it’s yield, or that Princeton cares about being able to better plan their class by knowing that the accepted student has a much higher chance of attending?</p>
<p>
By definition, someone has to be right on threshold of acceptance and rejection. I think the most likely explanation is you don’t have a good sense of which persons are on this border.</p>
<p>
They were the ones that most applied, considering the you made the comment about outdated info immediately after discussing the 2% vs 19% rate.</p>
<p>
Note that my response was in regards to your comment about all of the studies that cited the original study did not relate to to early action and admissions, then it was a problem with the study not discussing the same issues. I described why the 2011 study did this, which has data on similar issues. Now it sounds like you are changing your position and instead requiring that the recently cited study be specifically about Princeton’s recent class. Also note that the 2011 study looks at 2 schools, not “a bunch.” The author phrases it as, “Using admissions data from two liberal arts colleges, we add to the knowledge of the early decision process put forth by Avery” (Avery was the author of the original study).</p>