--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > The real problem with the study is the design itself.
> > > If it had a better design than a simple pre-post
> > > (which  makes no sense for research of this sort) non
> > > of these question would be discussed.
> > 
> > Are you saying the 36-hour hike in the murder rate
> > *was* an anomaly and that it *was* legitimate not
> > to take it into account?
> 
> Isn't discounting a large surge in the murder rate during 
> the period that crime was being measured

It was not "a large surge in the murder rate during
the period that crime was being measured."  It was a
spike occurring during a 36-hour segment of that
period (as I said).  The immediately following week,
while the course was still going on, there were far
*fewer* murders than normal, so the average number of 
murders per week over the duration of the course
remained the same as usual.

> a lot like saying:
>  
> "The IA course has successfully created a lasting state of
> peace, worldwide. We have not counted Iraq, Afghanistan, 
> Darfur, Chad, Sudan, Western Sahara, Somalia, Nigeria, and 
> Chechnya because they are anomalies."

Even overlooking the fact that certain kinds of
anomalies are, indeed, statistically insignificant
(as the TM researcher new morning cited who was
defending the study pointed out, this was such
a case, given the small total number of murders
in proportion to the *much* larger total number
of violent crimes whose rate was being studied),
no, the spike in the murder rate isn't at all like
what you say.

The D.C. study did not claim to have successfully
eliminated violent crime in D.C. on a permanent
basis; it claimed to have been responsible for a
temporary overall decline in the total number of
incidents of violent crime compared to what would
have been expected for that period if the course
had not taken place, and it *did* count the spike
in the number of murders per week.

The claim is that the spike, given the very
small percentage of incidents of violent crime
that murders always represent (there are over
10 times fewer murders than there are assaults),
was not significant with regard to the overall
decline in the number of violent crimes during
the study period.

This was in response to the ignorant claim by a
critic that the spike completely invalidated the
results of the study.



Reply via email to