|
|
Post by Blarney Rubble on Nov 25, 2013 11:31:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Blarney Rubble on Nov 25, 2013 15:07:33 GMT -5
Hah! Deleted after 20 minutes, as expected. Here's a screenshot of the page before they got rid of my comment.  |
|
joan
Member
Posts: 1,407
|
Post by joan on Nov 25, 2013 15:17:26 GMT -5
Maybe there are too few cards. Maybe double the amount might get a more accurate result. I think the article made sense & a decent argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Nov 25, 2013 15:22:31 GMT -5
Zak - your comment is still there. Near the bottom of the page, click a box that says "7 additional replies submitted and awaiting review"
|
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Nov 25, 2013 15:28:04 GMT -5
Maybe there are too few cards. Maybe double the amount might get a more accurate result. I think the article made sense & a decent argument. 25 cards is far too few to produce meaningful results, particularly if you only do a single run. A large number of trials is needed because with a small number you can be sure that people will appear to beat the odds sometimes, and at other times their performances will be way below the odds. A large number of trials evens out the ups and down and the results will approach exactly 20% more and more closely as the number of trials increases. |
|
joan
Member
Posts: 1,407
|
Post by joan on Nov 25, 2013 15:34:25 GMT -5
Maybe there are too few cards. Maybe double the amount might get a more accurate result. I think the article made sense & a decent argument. 25 cards is far too few to produce meaningful results, particularly if you only do a single run. A large number of trials is needed because with a small number you can be sure that people will appear to beat the odds sometimes, and at other times their performances will be way below the odds. A large number of trials evens out the ups and down and the results will approach exactly 20% more and more closely as the number of trials increases. Yes, ray, that's what the article said. |
|
|
|
Post by Blarney Rubble on Nov 25, 2013 15:38:28 GMT -5
"25 cards is far too few to produce meaningful results, particularly if you only do a single run."
The standard Zener test typically involves 2-10,000 runs. A single run would, of course, be meaningless. As would a single run with an ordinary pack of playing cards. It's the number of runs that matters, not the number of cards. Even when there are only two options - as in a standard coin tossing test - a subject's success rate (at guessing correctly) can be determined in terms of percentage against chance to a high degree of statistical reliability in a thousand or more runs. As I said in my comment, using Zener cards instead of playing cards does not make it easier to obtain a higher score in a standard Zener card test.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2013 0:47:51 GMT -5
I don't know, maybe it's me because I'm naive or something. But to me, you Zak, appear to me to be a highly intelligent thinking person. Doesn't mean I agree with you on everything, but you present your views very well. It kind of scares me in that I have to think of reasons for the times I don't agree with you.
|
|
