--- In [email protected], Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- L B Shriver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > LB, your last post in this thread was truncated, so I > couldn't include it, but I wanted to compliment you on > your observations. As you note, science is, at its > best, an international, public discourse. I can > understand MIU's reluctance to hand over the raw data > for reasons that have nothing to do with this > discourse. All movement research is for one purpose > only: to promote the teaching of TM/TM-Siddhis. It's > for PR only. Those in charge, MMY, aren't interested > in developing a coherent theory of the field effects > of consciousness. They just want to sell TM. The MIU > researchers won't hand over the raw data because the > ME is very weak, almost noise, not pattern. It can > easily be shown not to exist using alternative, and > more traditional, statistical methods used in this > type of research.
Yes. And in statistical methods such as multi-variate regression (and ARIMA which they used -- which can be thought of as a specialized subset of of regression methods), a large number of "model specifications" can be developed and tested. (A model specification being the articulation of dependent variable with various control and explanatory variables aka independent variables. Such as: crime is a function of weather, LE funding and unemployment. OR, crime = f(weather, lagged abortion rates, education levels) OR, crime = f(severity of punisment levels, conviction rates (agressive prossecution), police on the street. OR crime = f(lagged head start programs, lagged pre-natal care, lagged school lunch programs, and lagged classroom size). Many, many model specifications can be tested. A good analyst and research team will look to at least half a dozen key parameters to evaluate how well each model explains the variations in the dependent variable: i) overall model fit via R^2 and global F test, ii) the significance of each independent (control) variable, aka t-tests, i.e., was it a random effect?, iii) were the independent variables correlated with each other (a bad thing, called multi-collinearity), iv) are the variables correlated with past values of themselves aka autocorrelation (a bad thing), v) are the residuals random or skewed relative to the dependent variable aka hetroscadisity, (a bad thing), is the model specification consistent with "theory", aka does it tell a reasonable and plausible story -- or were a million independent variables tested, and chosen ONLY due to good fit (aka, which chan happen via 'spurious corrleation" but really are just randome effects, vii) is the data "good", viii, were the number of independent varibales less than 10-20x the number of observations, etc. Either by inexperience, or via intent to manipulate and arrive at a pre-selected result, a researcher can shoose model specifications that show a particular effect, via one paramenter, but are weak in other parameters. But these parameters or diagnostics (like the eight above) can be swept under the carpet and not cited in the research results, or worded in a best-spin sort of way (characteristic of some TMO reseaarchers, IMO). Thus, its critical to make the full original dataset available to other researchers to test the hypothesis via "their" approach to model specification and selection. If a suboptimal specification were chosen by the original researchers, because one or two paramenters shined, but others sucked, this "illusion" can be uncovered by indepedendent analysis and comparision of the results of different model specifications -- and the full spectrum of the relevant parameters and diagnostics associated with them. Or it may be found that alternative model specifications, strong on all levels, produces a different conclusion than the original research. This may indicates something important is missing in one or both models, and more analysis is necessary. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
