You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

othercriteria comments on Open Thread April 16 - April 22, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Tenoke 16 April 2014 07:05AM

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

Comments (190)

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

Comment author: othercriteria 16 April 2014 03:06:55PM 0 points [-]

Sure you can, in principle. When you have measured covariates, you can compare their sampled distribution to that of the population of interest. Find enough of a difference (modulo multiple comparisons, significance, researcher degrees of freedom, etc.) and you've detected bias. Ruling out systematic bias using your observations alone is much more difficult.

Even in this case, where we don't have covariates, there are some patterns in the ordinal data (the concept of ancillary statistics might be helpful in coming up with some of these) that would be extremely unlikely under unbiased sampling.

Comment author: ChristianKl 16 April 2014 03:15:59PM 1 point [-]

When you have measured covariates, you can compare their sampled distribution to that of the population of interest.

That means that you need more data. Having a standard against which to train your model means that you need more than just the results of your measurement.

Comment author: othercriteria 16 April 2014 03:37:06PM 0 points [-]

I was just contesting your statement as a universal one. For this poll, I agree you can't really pursue the covariate strategy. However, I think you're overstating challenge of getting more data and figuring out what to do with it.

For example, measuring BPD status is difficult. You can do it by conducting a psychological examination of your subjects (costly but accurate), you can do it by asking subjects to self-report on a four-level Likert-ish scale (cheap but inaccurate), or you could do countless other things along this tradeoff surface. On the other hand, measuring things like sex, age, level of education, etc. is easy. And even better, we have baseline levels of these covariates for communities like LessWrong, the United States, etc. with respect to which we might want to see if our sample is biased.

Comment author: ChristianKl 16 April 2014 05:27:01PM 1 point [-]

I was just contesting your statement as a universal one.

You argued against a more general statement than the one I made. But I did choose my words in a way that focused on drawing conclusions from the results and not results + comparison data.