3 ms·
I don't understand what is so disturbing about the Crabbe test. They injected mouse with cocaine and they observed that the mouse was moving more than normal. T
by krisoft 2y ago
I don't understand what is so disturbing about the Crabbe test. They injected mouse with cocaine and they observed that the mouse was moving more than normal. They different in how much more. But why would they expect that the extra movement be constant and consistent?
Now if one set of mouse moved more, while an other started blowing orange soap bubbles from their ears that would be disturbing. But just that the average differed? Maybe I should read the paper in question.
- casualrandomcom 2y agoAt first I thought you were not getting it, but, thinking it through, I now think the real problem is that the article gave us the averages (600, 701, 5000) without giving the standard deviations and nobody is outraged! The combined result of the three experiments can be either surprising or absolutely obvious: if the standard deviation of each of the three experiments was around 1 cm, it would be troubling, if it was 100 cm, it would be troublesome yet, but if the standard deviation is 5000 cm, there would be nothing wrong in what happened.
- krisoft 2y ago> without giving the standard deviations and nobody is outraged! I agree with that! I was just swallowing my outrage :D > if the standard deviation of each of the three experiments was around 1 cm, it would be troubling That would be very curious though! These are animals not robots :D The only way I could imagine them to average that small standard deviation in the distance moved if we paralyse (or almost paralyse) them.