4 ms·
> To find any real bias you would have to assure the subjects that the researchers were equally accomplished. What do you mean? I think you didn't understand t
by andrepd 4y ago
> To find any real bias you would have to assure the subjects that the researchers were equally accomplished.
What do you mean? I think you didn't understand the experiment. Subjects were shown the same text with, at random, a male name, female name, or initials. These names were not real researchers, nor familiar to the subjects.
> If it is known that most discoveries are made by males it is reasonable to give larger weight to new male-done research
I'm sure you can see the two different fallacies in this short sentence:
- There have been more male researchers than female, therefore more "discoveries" were made by men than women. No shit. This does not mean male researchers are better than female, obviously.
- There are more men being researchers therefore men's research should be given more weight therefore there are more men researchers therefore...
- erfgh 4y agoYou will find it beneficial to learn what a "prior probability distrubution" is.
- lupire 4y agoYou will find it beneficial to learn about "selection bias".
- WithinReason 4y agoIt's actually you who doesn't understand probabilities. If a woman is twice as likely to make a discovery but women are only 5% of researchers, then it's both true that: 1. most discoveries are made by males 2. it is reasonable to give larger weight to new female-done research contradicting you point.
- erfgh 4y agoBut you pulled those number out of thin air. The fact of the matter is that if I pick one research paper at random out of all the papers written by men and I pick another research paper at random out of all the papers written by women the former will be of higher average quality.
- WithinReason 4y agoDid you just pull that out of thin air?