> All data in of itself is useless. A sample pool of 10,000 volunteers is pretty good in the realm of statistics. The point isn't the size. The point is there

> All data in of itself is useless. A sample pool of 10,000 volunteers is pretty good in the realm of statistics. The point isn't the size. The point is there are too many confounding factors. It could be that people who work longer hours do so because they are high on trait conscientiousness, which also causes them to report low productivity It could even be because they are conscientious that they actually work slightly slower, and/or it could be that people who are less conscientious just don't care as mcuh about producing what was expected. To paraphrase the late Hitch: productivity metrics are not great. Neither is the word "connection" in science-adjacent reporting.