4 ms·

>That's a strawman argument for this study, which is not anecdotal but a large scale study with a statistically significant cohort. I never said it was anecdot

>That's a strawman argument for this study, which is not anecdotal but a large scale study with a statistically significant cohort. I never said it was anecdotal. Quite the opposite. Do you know what p hacking is? The number of methods to distort data without detection is too many to count. It's just a fact of life if you're exposed to enough studies on nearly any subject. Appeals to authority are just that. >How do you know until you try? What makes 5 days the optimal number? It's just some historical compromise we settled on with no scientific support, which is the aim of studies like the one in the article. Why not 6? Or 8? Or 2? 1? Define scientific support in this context. Going with a blanket approach to say 4 days a week should be the norm for every industry is quite unscientific. 4 day work weeks for any on call industry would be absurd. >The argument is less time at work = (greater morale + similar/better business outcomes) Then why aren't the businesses that already employ it outcompeting fortune 500 companies? Why isn't there clear evidence in the business themselves (being more competitive in their fields)? Why is it only the studies that come up with these results?

renjimen 4y ago
> Do you know what p hacking is? Yes, I work in statistics. P-hacking can be detected and should be exposed during proper peer review and by providing underlying data and methods for reproducibility. It would be nonsensical to throw out the entire scientific process and discredit all statistical studies because p-hacking can be done. > Why not 6? Or 8? Or 2? 1? Sure, let's try them all. But maybe not 8, because unless you're the Beatles that isn't going to happen. > 4 day work weeks for any on call industry would be absurd. Shifts exist for this reason. Nobody is on call 24/7. > Why isn't there clear evidence in the business themselves? The study itself showed the business benefits themselves are small. Probably smaller than time variability within a business or across many businesses. The point of the study was not to show business improved but to show that the business outcomes remain similar while employee satisfaction improved. Why wouldn't you want to live in a society where people are happier and business continues as usual?

renjimen 4y ago

> Do you know what p hacking is? Yes, I work in statistics. P-hacking can be detected and should be exposed during proper peer review and by providing underlying data and methods for reproducibility. It would be nonsensical to throw out the entire scientific process and discredit all statistical studies because p-hacking can be done. > Why not 6? Or 8? Or 2? 1? Sure, let's try them all. But maybe not 8, because unless you're the Beatles that isn't going to happen. > 4 day work weeks for any on call industry would be absurd. Shifts exist for this reason. Nobody is on call 24/7. > Why isn't there clear evidence in the business themselves? The study itself showed the business benefits themselves are small. Probably smaller than time variability within a business or across many businesses. The point of the study was not to show business improved but to show that the business outcomes remain similar while employee satisfaction improved. Why wouldn't you want to live in a society where people are happier and business continues as usual?