On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 07:09:44PM -0500, Jeremy Bowers wrote: > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 15:51:47 -0800, elena wrote: > > I can go to my friends, however it occurred to me that it might be > > better to post in a newsgroup and get a larger, more diverse, and > > random sample. > > Larger, yes, more diverse, yes, more random, probably not in the > statistical/scientific sense. Caveat emptor.
Bigtime, I see you have a occupation box for "Software Developer" and "Other." The data for software people (and lawyers) may be noisy becuase they take the questions literally. Because the answers are True/False folks might parse them narrowly for their truth value (and all in an effort to help!). for instance, "I find that it is possible to be too organized when performing certain kinds of tasks." False, I don't find this is possible because I'm not organized. This reminds me of a story, for Psychology 101 all freshman had to participate in three experiments by grad students. One I did involved riding on an excercise bike for ten minutes wearing a heart monitor. After that you could leave as soon as you felt your heartrate was back to normal. The study concluded that people are bad at knowing when their heart rate is elevated. I concluded that undergrads will only do the minimum to pass a course, and are willing to lie about their heartrate if it gets them out the door five minutes sooner. Be careful with data! -Jack -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
