|
Register | Blogging ![]() |
Today's Posts | Search |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools
![]() |
Display Modes
![]() |
|
![]() |
#2 (permalink) |
Fish in the percolator!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hobbit Land NZ
Posts: 2,914
|
![]()
The guy admits that it indicates correlation over causation so the title is really just an attention seeking hook.
And I know plenty of very intelligent people with rather deplorable musical tastes.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 (permalink) |
Juicious Maximus III
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 6,525
|
![]()
From the FAQ on that site : "Most of the musical artists are popular across wide SAT ranges"
Since the data is not consistent, that makes it a lot harder to say listening to that band makes it more likely that you are dumb or smart. I expect if the sample size was bigger and the selection of participants more representative, then the differences here between bands would smoothen out more. And of course music doesn't make you dumb .. It's just a hook. edit : Just for fun and to prove a little point, I used my own die-roller script to generate 10 numbers between 1 and 400 which is roughly the range of the SAT scores. Then I divided each value by 10 to get the averages. These are the numbers I got : 160,6 174,0 194,7 220,9 210,4 241,7 181,0 162,7 209,3 221,9 Most of them are relatively uniformly distributed around the mean, but I've bolded the highest and lowest scores. What you can see here is that even though we know the real average here is ~200, we have one value at 160 and one at 240. (To check if the average is ~200, I can pick 1000 numbers between 1 and 400 and see if that approximates 200000 .. then I get 196325. 196325/1000 = 196,325 ~ 200) If you say that 240 is U2 and MC Hammer is 160, then you can draw the conclusion that people listening to MC Hammer are more stupid than people listening to U2. However, in this example, it doesn't matter what they listen to since they are all random numbers. The difference is explained by stochastics, random chance. I don't know what kind of numbers of observations he has behind each group here, but I assume they are very small numbers and that makes it almost certain that random chance will mess with his results. F.ex, how many people are behind Beethoven's ratings on the chart? Abuse of statistics, I think.
__________________
Something Completely Different Last edited by Guybrush; 03-25-2009 at 04:54 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 (permalink) | |
Master, We Perish
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Havin a good time, rollin to the bottom.
Posts: 3,710
|
![]()
I used my powers to take back bad comments.
__________________
Quote:
^if you wanna know perfection that's it, you dumb shits Spoiler for guess what:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|