3 ms·
Very interesting, and I think this part sums up the crux: “The researchers believe that you can only analyze the raw responses because, statistically, any sequ
by stingraycharles 5y ago
Very interesting, and I think this part sums up the crux:
“The researchers believe that you can only analyze the raw responses because, statistically, any sequence is equally likely to occur, so where do you draw the line?”
I’d say that, as it is a psychological study, making claims about a human behavior, treating humans as pure random number generators without considering _intent_ is a mistake.
It is entirely possible that older people fill in more “questionable” responses because they can’t be bothered with the study, and that this causes the “decline” in ability as people age.
But we don’t know for sure, because it was never investigated. Thus, the biggest problem is the original study not even bringing this into light, even though it appears the original authors were aware of it.
- Hendrikto 5y agoBut how can you go from a random sequence to the intent of a subject? I don’t think you really can.
- Shaanie 5y agoOne thing many surveys/studies do is to include "trap" questions (I'm sure there's a real name for 'em) which disqualifies any participants that answer them incorrectly.
- stingraycharles 5y agoI think they’re called “control questions”, as their purpose isn’t related to the study, but rather to control for BS answers.
- shusaku 5y agoI think they are being overly kind. The conclusion itself shouldn’t be sensitive to just removing the all H if all T answers. Since their trend disappears from removing just those answers, were only left with the far more mundane “older people are more likely to write all Hs or Ts”. The true conclusion was hidden by the averaging that goes on when you make a best fit line.