4 ms·
Did they study a lot of professions? Just by chance one of them can incur into a type I error.
by torcete 3y ago
Did they study a lot of professions? Just by chance one of them can incur into a type I error.
- Jeff_Brown 3y agoYeah it sounds like p-hacking to me. Would be nice if they had preregistered the study design. However, the article does say it was a "study of magicians", not a study of medical data from the general population.
- e63f67dd-065b 3y agoThe paper mainly concerns itself with a sample of magicians vs another of the general population (with matching age, sex, etc). The second part compares magicians with artists, actors, comedians, poets, musicians, and a general population. Personally the most suspicious part about this is the O-LIFE questionnaire; it tests for things like "unusual experiences", "cognitive disorganisation", "impulsive nonconformity", "Introvertive anhedonia", and a bunch of other things that are reminiscent of all the non-replicable personality research from a decade ago. O-LIFE was developed in 1995, well before replication crisis questions started popping up, so who knows.