Interesting Research by Cornell Psychology Prof

Started by Ken70, January 17, 2011, 12:31:26 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

KeithK

Quote from: Robb
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82
Quote from: Roy 82Bem on Colbert last Thursday.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/372474/january-27-2011/time-traveling-porn---daryl-bem

Saw that.  Didn't exactly help his "cause", did it?
Not for me.  53% is "significant" because that's the amount of the popular vote Obama got?  Funny, I don't remember studying the "one-tailed Obama test" in any of my stats classes...
53% would be pretty damn significant if he had as many samples as there were votes in 2008.

Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: KeithK
Quote from: Robb
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82
Quote from: Roy 82Bem on Colbert last Thursday.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/372474/january-27-2011/time-traveling-porn---daryl-bem

Saw that.  Didn't exactly help his "cause", did it?
Not for me.  53% is "significant" because that's the amount of the popular vote Obama got?  Funny, I don't remember studying the "one-tailed Obama test" in any of my stats classes...
53% would be pretty damn significant if he had as many samples as there were votes in 2008.

And the whole discussion came down to:  Weak statistics show that people have ESP because they anticipated porn appearing.  Did it have to be porn?  Besides the fact that the statistics don't seem overwhelming, the fact that it was porn really makes the study look somewhat silly, or at least childish.

Robb

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82
Quote from: KeithK
Quote from: Robb
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82
Quote from: Roy 82Bem on Colbert last Thursday.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/372474/january-27-2011/time-traveling-porn---daryl-bem

Saw that.  Didn't exactly help his "cause", did it?
Not for me.  53% is "significant" because that's the amount of the popular vote Obama got?  Funny, I don't remember studying the "one-tailed Obama test" in any of my stats classes...
53% would be pretty damn significant if he had as many samples as there were votes in 2008.

And the whole discussion came down to:  Weak statistics show that people have ESP because they anticipated porn appearing.  Did it have to be porn?  Besides the fact that the statistics don't seem overwhelming, the fact that it was porn really makes the study look somewhat silly, or at least childish.
Apparently, it did - the other 8 studies (that didn't use porn) didn't find anything...
Let's Go RED!

Trotsky

Quote from: RobbApparently, it did - the other 8 studies (that didn't use porn) didn't find anything...
Occam's Razor.  We are always anticipating porn.

ugarte

Quote from: Trotsky
Quote from: RobbApparently, it did - the other 8 studies (that didn't use porn) didn't find anything...
Occam's Razor.  We are always anticipating porn.
This. Or we are just optimistic by nature.