On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 02:12:46 GMT, "Milo Schield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
<Snip>
>But in most of your examples MORE is being claimed. In most cases, the
>claim includes an inference. Once the claim involves an inference, then a
>statistical test may be relevant.
>
>In one case, the claim was discrimination (causal explanation of observed
>differences); in another the claim was greater scoring ability (causal
>explanation of observed differences).
I don't think so. I think the issue was scoring production,
not ability, and the example was deliberately restricted:
>>[This being a
>>hypothetical example, assume, for the sake of argument,
>>that this is a valid and complete measure
>> of basketball performance.]
>>
>> White Black
>> -------------
>> 12.8 13.7
>> 11.1 22.3
>> 19.9 20.9
>> 13.9
>> 16.8
>> 17.1
>> 13.0
I set up the example trying to
[artificially] restrict a discussion which would, naturally,
evolve in many directions. Of course "point scoring
ability" is not the same as "points scored," etc.
And, of course, point production is, in the real world,
not the sole measure of basketball performance.
>
>In both cases, the inference involves generalizing from a small "sample" of
>time to a larger "population" of time. Thus, the strength of the argument
>is influenced by the time-span of the data. In the case of MIT, had the
>data been based on only one month, the case would be much weaker in support
>of discrimination than if we had data for 12 years. In the case of
>basketball scoring of white and black players, the case would be much weaker
>if we included only one quarter of one game than if we had included many
>games.
>
>How can we measure the influence of the time span involved in the data?
>Here is where IMHO one can make a case for statistical tests being RELEVANT.
>
>PS. Just because MIT can "attribute" an outcome (difference in pay/status)
>to a particular cause (discrimination) does not mean their argument is
>strong. A claim involving the existence/influence of an unobservable
>(discrimination) requires evidence. In this case, I think statistical
>inference may provide some of that evidence.
>
And?
--Jim
--------------------
James H. Steiger, Professor
Department of Psychology
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6T 1Z4
----------------------
Note: I urge all members of this list to read
the following and inform themselves carefully
of the truth about the MIT Report on the Status
of Women Faculty.
Patricia Hausman and James Steiger Article,
"Confession Without Guilt?" :
http://www.iwf.org/news/mitfinal.pdf
Judith Kleinfeld's Article Critiquing the MIT Report:
http://www.uaf.edu/northern/mitstudy/#note9back
Original MIT Report on the Status of Women Faculty:
http://mindit.netmind.com/proxy/http://web.mit.edu/fnl/
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
