Carter says our chance of success was 50 percent. 50?! I thought it was much higher. Another gut check. Would we have gone with Tony at 50 percent?Argo hostage story: Mark Lijek’s true account of fleeing Iran. - Slate Magazine
Carter says our chance of success was 50 percent. 50?! I thought it was much higher. Another gut check. Would we have gone with Tony at 50 percent?Argo hostage story: Mark Lijek’s true account of fleeing Iran. - Slate Magazine
Here’s my list of startup advice: Be alive. Be male. Be young. Don’t have health issues. Be born in America or move there. Enter the cycle after a recession. Speak English. Enter a growing/new field where the level of competition is low and so is the sophistication of your competition. Surf cost trends down from expensive to mass consumer markets. Work bottom up - on small things. Be of above average intelligence. Have family support. Have a college degree. Oh and most importantly of all: Get fucking lucky. The hindsight/survivorship biases in combination with faulty causality and the narrative fallacy will completely hose your thinking - so be careful.Startups: never have so many understood so little about the statistics of varian… | Hacker News
Is Psychology About to Come Undone? - Percolator - The Chronicle of Higher EducationBoth Psych File Drawer and the Reproducibility Project were started in part because it’s hard to get a replication published even when a study cries out for one. For instance, Daryl J. Bem’s 2011 study that seemed to prove that extra-sensory perception is real — that subjects could, in a limited sense, predict the future — got no shortage of attention and seemed to turn everything we know about the world upside-down.
Yet when Stuart Ritchie, a doctoral student in psychology at the University of Edinburgh, and two colleagues failed to replicate his findings, they had a heck of a time getting the results into print (they finally did, just recently, after months of trying). It may not be a coincidence that the journal that published Bem’s findings, the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, is one of the three selected for scrutiny.
This closes (for now) the series of posts on the IQ fallacy. There is more here and here if you are interested in the issue, which started with intelligence testing (among other things) and then took that awkward and despicable turn towards measuring sexual attractiveness.
The background lesson is that valid statistical analysis is useful not just to sort out who is right and who is wrong: it would have avoided the problem entirely in the first place.
Disclaimer: I know people in both institutions, although I do not know the main wrongdoer in the controversy.