6 ms·

A small sample of students taking a survey isn't very convincing evidence.

wwweston 8y ago
It's certainly not total evidence, and I rather imagine there are limits to the effect if it exists at all. But 118 students isn't that small of a sample (if I'm picking a methodological criticism, it'd be that it's a sample of college students rather than the general population). And the exercise seems reasonably likely to provide some of the reported effect, and those effects fit with other studies that hold reading/writing fiction improves people's ability to model others better and some degree of empathy.
lordCarbonFiber 8y ago
And yet you can't provide any counter evidence.
- ericdykstra 8y ago
  The burden of proof for efficacy is on the ones dragging employees into mandatory meetings about non-work-related material. But just for fun, here's another HBR article that shows that "the three most popular interventions make firms less diverse." https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail
mlevental 8y ago
you asked if there was any evidence and then when evidence was given you dismissed it. do you know what the word "any" means? also this is argument in bad faith (asking for evidence and then discounting validity).
- ericdykstra 8y ago
  It's bad faith to ask for evidence, then when provided with bad evidence, to say that it's bad? I've read a good amount of the literature on this subject, and haven't found any compelling evidence that diversity training does anything but shield companies from lawsuits to some extent.
  - mlevental 8y ago
    >haven't found any compelling evidence you really don't see how this is circular? how do you feel about this paraphrasing of climate change denial? "I've read a good amount of the literature on this subject, and haven't found any compelling evidence that climate change is an anthropogenically driven process." or this one of heliocentrism "I've read a good amount of the literature on this subject, and haven't found any compelling evidence that the sun is at the center of the solar system." or this one of "I've read a good amount of the literature on this subject, and haven't found any compelling evidence that the earth is round." you get my point? "compelling" is personal.
    - ericdykstra 8y ago
      You're comparing apples and oranges. What we know about our ball earth and heliocentrism are as close to solved science as it gets. I don't know much about climate change theory, but for the purposes of this conversation let's just say it's less settled than heliocentrism (we know and can predict patterns of the Earth's movement around the sun into the far future with great accuracy, but there is no such accuracy with prediction of climate change). But you compare those to diversity training efficacy, which has no empirical evidence, and the controlled studies examining effects have conflicting results. This is just not an honest comparison at all. I dismissed your study because it literally doesn't tell me anything about the real world, not because I hand-waive anything that I don't agree with. Would you change any of your own life habits based on how 100 college kids subjectively reported on their feelings? It's ridiculous to compare the amount of information that kind of study tells us to the astounding accuracy of how our heliocentric model of the solar system can and has predicted where and when solar eclipses will happen down to the minute.

It's certainly not total evidence, and I rather imagine there are limits to the effect if it exists at all. But 118 students isn't that small of a sample (if I'm picking a methodological criticism, it'd be that it's a sample of college students rather than the general population). And the exercise seems reasonably likely to provide some of the reported effect, and those effects fit with other studies that hold reading/writing fiction improves people's ability to model others better and some degree of empathy.

lordCarbonFiber 8y ago

And yet you can't provide any counter evidence.

ericdykstra 8y ago
The burden of proof for efficacy is on the ones dragging employees into mandatory meetings about non-work-related material. But just for fun, here's another HBR article that shows that "the three most popular interventions make firms less diverse." https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail

mlevental 8y ago

you asked if there was any evidence and then when evidence was given you dismissed it. do you know what the word "any" means? also this is argument in bad faith (asking for evidence and then discounting validity).

ericdykstra 8y ago
It's bad faith to ask for evidence, then when provided with bad evidence, to say that it's bad? I've read a good amount of the literature on this subject, and haven't found any compelling evidence that diversity training does anything but shield companies from lawsuits to some extent.
- mlevental 8y ago
  >haven't found any compelling evidence you really don't see how this is circular? how do you feel about this paraphrasing of climate change denial? "I've read a good amount of the literature on this subject, and haven't found any compelling evidence that climate change is an anthropogenically driven process." or this one of heliocentrism "I've read a good amount of the literature on this subject, and haven't found any compelling evidence that the sun is at the center of the solar system." or this one of "I've read a good amount of the literature on this subject, and haven't found any compelling evidence that the earth is round." you get my point? "compelling" is personal.
  - ericdykstra 8y ago
    You're comparing apples and oranges. What we know about our ball earth and heliocentrism are as close to solved science as it gets. I don't know much about climate change theory, but for the purposes of this conversation let's just say it's less settled than heliocentrism (we know and can predict patterns of the Earth's movement around the sun into the far future with great accuracy, but there is no such accuracy with prediction of climate change). But you compare those to diversity training efficacy, which has no empirical evidence, and the controlled studies examining effects have conflicting results. This is just not an honest comparison at all. I dismissed your study because it literally doesn't tell me anything about the real world, not because I hand-waive anything that I don't agree with. Would you change any of your own life habits based on how 100 college kids subjectively reported on their feelings? It's ridiculous to compare the amount of information that kind of study tells us to the astounding accuracy of how our heliocentric model of the solar system can and has predicted where and when solar eclipses will happen down to the minute.