3 ms·
> Some analysis is better than no analysis. I don't agree with that. Doing some analysis on a limited and possibly skewed data set can lull you into a false se
by ejlangev 8y ago
> Some analysis is better than no analysis.
I don't agree with that. Doing some analysis on a limited and possibly skewed data set can lull you into a false sense of understanding. It makes your ideas seems objective when they can in fact be completely baseless.
- alexanderdmitri 8y agoHow is no analysis just as good? It's hard to believe that the percentage of successes with no analysis is GTE the percentage of successes with some analysis.
- ACow_Adonis 8y agoI presume because faulty analysis or bad data can actually get you more off track than when its just a "back of the napkin" based guess or hunch. And additionally, you now have the pride/confidence thing in your even worse results because you did "analysis"...
- jacobush 8y agoOften the pride is constant.
- bpchaps 8y agoAre you saying that zero middle ground exists?
- ejlangev 8y agoI didn't downvote you :(
- bpchaps 8y agoSorry - edited. Still didn't answer the question, though :p
- Dylan16807 8y agoObviously a middle ground exists, but it's possible that in part of the scale you get worse results as you head toward the middle.
- jamesrcole 8y agoAs always, you need to take the limitations of the available information into account. That ought to be part of the analysis, though of course it often, or perhaps usually, isn't.
- 08-15 8y agoNot at all. Analysis of limited data gives you wide credible intervals, the exact thing that guards against unwarranted confidence.