3 ms·
Like I said previously, citing any of these values to prove a point is dubious. That said I have retracted my top level comment and admitted that my analysis is
by ironmagma 5y ago
Like I said previously, citing any of these values to prove a point is dubious. That said I have retracted my top level comment and admitted that my analysis is wrong. What more do you want?
- throwaway894345 5y agoProps for admitting your error, but falling back to “there must be a problem with the way the data was collected (because it contradicts my priors)” isn’t particularly admirable.
- ironmagma 5y agoIt's pretty ridiculous that in order to be in the clear I would have to agree with the way the survey was conducted and presented when it obviously causes confusion, but okay.
- throwaway894345 5y agoNo one suggested you have to agree with the survey’s methodology. It’s one thing to identify specific problems with the survey and quite another thing to cite the survey yourself, then when your argument is rebutted, to argue that there must be something methodologically wrong with the survey.
- ironmagma 5y agoThe survey isn’t wrong because it says something I don’t want it to, it’s wrong because it says something other than what it reads as. Elsewhere I said it was either the methodology or the presentation. If they had measured dread and it said something other than I wanted it to, fine. If they hadn’t measured dread but hadn’t presented it as if they had, also fine. But as it is, the survey is misleading because it shows dread as though it was an actual quantity and it’s not. For instance we know that in psychology, you can’t measure unhappiness, invert the numbers, and call it happiness, because happiness and unhappiness are not mutually exclusive.