3 ms·
> I'd read this as "In excess of their expected appearance rate" That's a successful rhetorical technique. There are lies, damned lies and statistics. What if
by jimmywanger 10y ago
> I'd read this as "In excess of their expected appearance rate"
That's a successful rhetorical technique.
There are lies, damned lies and statistics. What if I told you that 40% of sick days were taken on Monday and Friday?
Your brain instantly fills in "because they want a three day weekend", not "well that was expected".
People who write these articles are experts at letting us fill in the blanks.
- Pica_soO 10y agoThese studies never seem to have the troubles that other scientific studies have, repeat-ability, outliers or biases at picking companies. If you pick the best of a wider selection, the result is to be better of course, but even then, some companies should screw up just because - the noise of a complex world, where good employees might not overcome bad management or bad circumstances.
- debatem1 10y agoIs your argument that this interpretation is numerically wrong or that you don't like the phrasing? It matches my read numerically. Still post hoc fallacy. Edit: I'd->is
- gohrt 10y agoYou seem to be overlooking the word "more" in "35% more likely". It's not "35% chance". You brain is very good at filling in absent words to change the logical content of a statement.
- mining 10y agoNo, I'd parse that as being 2/5. The difference is, you didn't say "40% more sick days are taken on Monday and Friday", which would imply (M+F) = 1.4(T+W+T) -> 58% of sick days taken on Monday and Friday, and 42% of sick days taken on the remaining days.