RobinZ comments on Over-encapsulation - Less Wrong

18 Post author: PhilGoetz 25 March 2010 05:58PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (56)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RobinZ 26 March 2010 02:29:01AM 0 points [-]

Back up - are you suggesting that a random factor could have that big an effect on the results? How small are their sample sizes?

Comment author: PhilGoetz 26 March 2010 01:02:19PM *  2 points [-]

The sample size is 16, which should be enough. A random factor shouldn't have that big an effect if the trials were uncorrelated. To make the trials uncorrelated, they would need to interleave their trials. For instance, if they do all the 30-minute tests, then all the 45-minute tests, then all the 60-minute tests, each group of tests is almost completely correlated in environmental conditions. Because rats have such different senses than humans, it's impossible for a human to tell by observation whether something unusual to a rat is going on.

The expectation of the experimenter is another factor that can correlate results within a trial group. We usually require double-blind tests on humans, but not on rats.