Editing Talk:1594: Human Subjects
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The responses in panels 1, 3, and 4 show that Megan is trying to downplay the issues despite better knowledge. This is probably done to surprise the reader of the dialogue for better dramatic effect. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.159|162.158.91.159]] 05:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC) | The responses in panels 1, 3, and 4 show that Megan is trying to downplay the issues despite better knowledge. This is probably done to surprise the reader of the dialogue for better dramatic effect. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.159|162.158.91.159]] 05:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
In the second panel, Megan makes a good point which Ponytail misses. If the control group had a high incidence of arson, while the experimental group did not (and assuming that proper protocols were followed in assigning subjects to groups), there is a possibility that the drug has the side-effect of suppressing the urge for arson [[User:Sysin|Sysin]] ([[User talk:Sysin|talk]]) 06:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC) | In the second panel, Megan makes a good point which Ponytail misses. If the control group had a high incidence of arson, while the experimental group did not (and assuming that proper protocols were followed in assigning subjects to groups), there is a possibility that the drug has the side-effect of suppressing the urge for arson [[User:Sysin|Sysin]] ([[User talk:Sysin|talk]]) 06:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC) | ||
Line 6: | Line 7: | ||
:::In this case both the control and the test group must be full of arsonists and the question is why did Ponytail let them lose to commit arson in the first place. May bye a double-blind test?[[User:Jkotek|Jkotek]] ([[User talk:Jkotek|talk]]) 13:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC) | :::In this case both the control and the test group must be full of arsonists and the question is why did Ponytail let them lose to commit arson in the first place. May bye a double-blind test?[[User:Jkotek|Jkotek]] ([[User talk:Jkotek|talk]]) 13:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC) | ||
:::Maybe both groups were arsonists and the thing helps prevent the person from getting arrested somehow. [[User:Mulan15262|Mulan15262]] ([[User talk:Mulan15262|talk]]) 14:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC) | :::Maybe both groups were arsonists and the thing helps prevent the person from getting arrested somehow. [[User:Mulan15262|Mulan15262]] ([[User talk:Mulan15262|talk]]) 14:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC) | ||
β | |||
:Another interpretation of the second panel is that Ponytail went fishing for patterns in the data, and happened to find the apparent cluster of arson arrests. There is no obvious reason why arson arrests would have any bearing on a drug trial. (Of course this depends on the drug, but the experiment in the last panel is about moisturizing cream; since no more specifics are given there is no reason to assume it is a psychologically active substance.) If you look at enough variables about a group of people (be they ever-so carefully randomly selected) you will probably find some "unusual" pattern - some way that they differ from the entire population. | :Another interpretation of the second panel is that Ponytail went fishing for patterns in the data, and happened to find the apparent cluster of arson arrests. There is no obvious reason why arson arrests would have any bearing on a drug trial. (Of course this depends on the drug, but the experiment in the last panel is about moisturizing cream; since no more specifics are given there is no reason to assume it is a psychologically active substance.) If you look at enough variables about a group of people (be they ever-so carefully randomly selected) you will probably find some "unusual" pattern - some way that they differ from the entire population. |