Homestead mailing list

["Lynda" <lurine AT com-pair.net>]

When I worked in rehab I correlated and typed up the finished product for a
bunch of shrinks on a study they did.  Their objective was to prove how
needed they were and to get more funding for studies.  The study was
collected data over a 25/50/75 year period and from data from NA, SA and
Europe.

They got the study finished and asked that I put all the data into graphes
and spreadsheets.  Well, the data ended up showing that shrinks drove the
need, the need didn't drive the number of shrinks.

That study and the discs went in the shredder!

In college, we had a ton of fun with surveys in the statistical math class.
You're right.  Phrasing and choosing who you ask is what drives the results.
We had a bunch of fun with surveys.  Haven't trusted one since!

Lynda
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Wendy" <crazygardens AT verizon.net>

> Most studies on anything should be ignored.  I think they should be
> required
> to name who funded the study to be published.  I took a class in college
> that required us to take a survey topic and prove it regardless of whether
> the outcome was actually what could be predicted or not.  It was a class
> in
> statistical methodology.  We used the phrasing of our questions and the
> selection of our sample.  What I learned was that ANYTHING can be proven
> if
> it is presented and sampled correctly.  At the time, I thought the class
> was
> a waste of my time.  But I have relied on what I learned from that class
> so
> many times throughout my life to spot the BS that I wish I had taken it
> more
> seriously at the time.