3 ms·
> The researchers recruited 218 participants from Amazon Mechanical Turk, an online task platform. The volunteers were randomly assigned to one of six different
by itsdrewmiller 8y ago
> The researchers recruited 218 participants from Amazon Mechanical Turk, an online task platform. The volunteers were randomly assigned to one of six different websites that were designed to reflect a site with a crowd cue or one without the crowd cue, a site with a connectivity cue or no connectivity cue, or a site that reflected the community framing or no framing.
n=218 across 6 groups testing 3 different variables (also why not 2^3=8 groups?). Let me know when it replicates. :-|
- mitchtbaum 8y ago> Let me know when it replicates. :-| Why not just put a (tentative) next to the findings and take it for what it is?
- User23 8y agoWhy not just put a (tentative) next to your newspaper’s astrology column? Clickbait Crap like this is why there is a replication crisis.
- mitchtbaum 8y agoastrology tentative?.. ha! "Millionaires don't use astrology, billionaires do." > replication crisis more like a paradigm crisis... Scientism ftl!
- icelancer 8y agoThe findings were significant, presumably, and this bitching about replication without doing anything about it isn't helping. You replicate it and let us know what you find if it's such a pain to you.
- fwip 8y ago33 people per group is enough for statistical significance with moderate effect size, which they found here. If you don't think it's legit, get a counter-study published. Or go into the math and show how they used the wrong statistical test. Peer-review exists, and the people doing it are a lot smarter than "um sample size lol."