not by balancing out what's already happened, but by diluting what's already happened with new data, until the past is so proportionally negligible that it can safely be forgotten." [p. Also see an Ellenberg discussion in “How Can Rich People Vote Republican and Rich States Vote for Democrats? “Best, Smith, and Stubbs (2001) found a positive relationship between perceived scientific hardness of psychology journals and the proportion of area devoted to graphs. (2002) found an inverse relationship between area devoted to tables and perceived scientific hardness.” “We are living in an age that glorifies the single study,” says … “It’s a folly perpetuated not just by scientists, but by academic journals, the media, granting agencies—we’re all complicit in this hunger for fast, definitive answers.” “Most of these studies will ultimately end up in the dustbin of history,” says …
74] "'I've been in a thousand arguments over this topic [hot hand],' [Amos Tversky] said. the Duke post-doc, “not because of misconduct, but because that’s how the scientific process works.
- updating moodle
- Girls sex talk or chat
- clea dating
- dating bulgarian london
- Iranian live chat cam sex
The groups also differed on such measures as 'satisfaction with stool consistency,' a phrase that I honestly never thought I would write." "By rich data, I mean data that’s accurate, precise and subjected to rigorous quality control.
A few years ago, a debate raged about how many RBIs Cubs slugger Hack Wilson had in 1930.
Researchers went to the microfiche, looked up box scores and found that it was 191, not 190.
Absolutely nothing changed about our understanding of baseball, but it shows the level of scrutiny to which stats are subjected." "Notice how there's no mention of pounds per square inch? Taken literally, the rules say that the bladder inside the football should weigh between 12.5 and 13.5 lbs. According to the NFL's own rules, football is meant be played with something approaching the weight of the average bowling ball..." Submitted by Bill Peterson, with thanks to John Schmitt for pointing out the graph Cancer’s random assault By Denise Grady, New York Times, 5 January 2015 The article concerns a recent research paper, Variation in cancer risk among tissues can be explained by the number of stem cell divisions (Science 2 January 2015).
From the abstract Here, we show that the lifetime risk of cancers of many different types is strongly correlated (0.81) with the total number of divisions of the normal self-renewing cells maintaining that tissue’s homeostasis.