3 ms·
A good reminder about calculating statistics and making accurate predictions. When analyzing why a group of objects (usually very small, like successful compan
by cLeEOGPw 11y ago
A good reminder about calculating statistics and making accurate predictions.
When analyzing why a group of objects (usually very small, like successful companies) have a certain trait, it is not enough to find something all these objects had in common and say that it was the reason. At bare minimum, you have to look at all the rest of objects and confirm that they did not have that thing in common too. And even that would not be enough. After finding something ONLY these objects of interest have in common, you should test the prediction on new objects whose outcome is not yet known and confirm the accuracy.
It sounds really simple, but sometimes even scientific paper writers can't resist urge to release "finding" that has hidden flaws like that.
- gnaritas 11y ago> When analyzing why a group of objects (usually very small, like successful companies) have a certain trait, it is not enough to find something all these objects had in common and say that it was the reason. But it's enough to sell a book claiming so. > At bare minimum, you have to look at all the rest of objects and confirm that they did not have that thing in common too. That would rule out way too many profitable books. /s
- rdancer 11y ago"Recent survey of Swiss centenarians found that 83.4% drank at least one large glass of red wine per day, 86.7% included some form of light exercise in their daily routine, and 99.7% were dead."