= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
pragmatist comments on [LINK] Why I'm not on the Rationalist Masterlist - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (866)
Do you really believe that the quality of most studies on this topic is so poor that this extremely flawed research strategy you recommend is more likely to be reliable? That seems like an unjustifiably dim view of the relevant research community.
I don't disagree that asking women you know is one easy way to get evidence on this question, but I would think that even a pretty poorly conducted scientific study would constitute superior evidence.
Yes.
P.S. I do love how directly querying the reality surrounding you is described as an "extremely flawed research strategy" X-D
Well querying it in sample sizes that are much smaller and less random than even the shoddiest academic study is, by comparison, indeed "extremely flawed".
Well their not systematically biased, unlike the samples that someone with an agenda is likely to use.
I said this below as well, but it's fairly well buried now so I'll repeat it here for others' benefit:
Your hypothesis that any research on fear of rape will be systematically biased towards the claim that the vast majority of women are frequently, distressingly afraid of rape is strongly contraindicated by the fact that the arbitrarily-chosen (i.e., they were open access) research sources I cited at the top of this thread support the opposite conclusion.
(To clarify: I really don't care very much about this question and as such I'm content to just go along with the rough approximations that a couple of old surveys provided. If someone was actually trying to get a really good answer I would suggest they look further and deeper. Published research would probably be a good start; given what I've seen so far, your hypothesis that it's systematically and hopelessly biased to the point of uselessness is not persuasive)
Um... the particular method you suggested is an extremely flawed research strategy. Especially considering that one of your complaints about the research linked by Vulture was that the sample may not be representative. I don't know about you, but the women I know well do not constitute a particularly representative sample of women in general.
Describing your experiment as "directly querying the reality surrounding you" makes it sound pretty dandy, but if you actually look at the specifics of the experiment, it's subject to a host of biases.