3 ms·

So, he's just explained Standard Deviation?

• showerst 17y ago
  You'd be amazed how many smart people don't have a decent grounding in statistics, so any easy reference to explain this is nice.
  • Torn 17y ago
    Fair point, and yes it's quite informative from that point of view. I didn't like his approach however, he seemed to be beating around the bush a lot with phrases like I'm here to rescue you with a statistically sound yet incredibly simple formula than giving a more honest 'hey, what you need is Standard Deviation, and here's how it works!'
    • smartbear 17y ago
      No Torn, you're still not using the correct statistic. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH STANDARD DEVIATION. Also, how can you say that the article isn't "honest," especially given the complete, precise explanation for the stats at the end.
      • Torn 17y ago
        Seems I'm haemorrhaging karma over this. I misjudged the method used (Pearson's Chi Square, as pointed out by hn user pibefision). Fine, that'll teach me to skim read and comment. My point above was that the author could have come out and labelled it as such in the article.
• pibefision 17y ago
  No, he explained Pearson's Chi Square.