#selectionbias — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #selectionbias, aggregated by home.social.
-
DATE: May 12, 2026 at 10:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------TITLE: Are the benefits of psychedelics exaggerated? A new study highlights the problem of selection bias
A study comparing psychedelic enthusiasts and people from the general population (who also had psychedelic experiences) found that the enthusiasts tended to report much greater positive quality-of-life effects. The enthusiasts also showed higher openness, extraversion, and agreeableness. This indicates that recruitment strategies in psychedelic research that lean towards including enthusiasts may shape the outcomes obtained in those studies. The paper was published in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs.
Psychedelic drugs are substances that can strongly alter perception, mood, thinking, and the sense of self. They may change how people experience colors, sounds, time, memories, emotions, and the meaning of events. Classic psychedelics include LSD, psilocybin from “magic mushrooms,” DMT, and mescaline. These substances mainly act on serotonin receptors in the brain.
In research settings, psychedelics are being studied for possible therapeutic use in conditions such as depression, PTSD, anxiety, and substance use disorders. Their effects depend heavily on dose, personality, expectations, mental state, physical setting, and social support. Psychedelics can also carry risks, including panic, confusion, dangerous behavior during intoxication, worsening of some psychiatric conditions, and legal consequences where they are prohibited.
Study author Jonathan Bendz and his colleagues noted that many studies of psychedelic users report extraordinarily positive self-reported effects. However, they suggest that this might represent an exaggeration of the real effects caused by biased selection, or even self-selection, of study participants. The issue is that the effects of psychedelics can only be tested on individuals who agree to use them. These participants tend to be individuals who have already had especially positive experiences with psychedelic use.
To examine this hypothesis, these researchers conducted a study comparing whether the self-reported quality-of-life impact of psychedelic experiences differed between a convenience sample of psychedelic enthusiasts and a group of people from the general population recruited via Prolific. They also wanted to see whether the difference between the two groups remained after controlling for mindset, setting, motivation to use psychedelic drugs, and personality traits.
The enthusiast group consisted of 583 individuals recruited through an anonymous survey posted on the Facebook and Instagram pages of a Swedish nonprofit organization that disseminates information about psychedelic science (Nätverket för Psykedelisk Vetenskap). A snowball sampling approach was used to reach more participants. The general population group consisted of 599 individuals recruited via Prolific (an online survey platform). They were required to have prior psychedelic experience, but were not recruited from a specific psychedelic community.
Study participants completed assessments of the quality-of-life impact of their psychedelic experiences (e.g., “How has your most meaningful psychedelic experience affected the quality of your relationship with… family, friends, yourself, society, and nature?”). They also answered questions regarding their mindset and physical setting during the experience (“To what extent did you experience your mindset/environment to be optimal?”), their motivation (“What was your motivation for using a psychedelic substance?”), and their personality (using the IPIP-NEO-30 assessment).
Results showed that the psychedelic enthusiasts tended to report a much higher quality-of-life impact from their psychedelic experiences compared to the Prolific group. The enthusiast group also reported having a more optimal mindset and setting during their trips, and they were more likely to report taking the drugs for personal growth rather than for fun. Finally, the enthusiasts tended to be more open to new experiences, extraverted, and agreeable than the participants from the Prolific group.
Even after using a statistical model to account for these differences in personality, mindset, setting, and motivation, simply belonging to the enthusiast group remained the strongest predictor of reporting a high quality-of-life impact.
“As expected, participants recruited from an enthusiast-leaning channel reported considerably greater benefits [of psychedelic use] than those recruited from a general-population platform. Even after controlling for mindset, setting, motivation, and personality, sample membership remained the strongest predictor of quality-of-life impact,” the study authors concluded.
“The persistent effect of sample membership suggests that the two groups differ in additional ways not captured by our measures, for example in cultural expectations, social context, or demographic composition, shaping reported outcomes. These results underscore the need for caution when interpreting findings from psychedelic studies that rely on highly engaged user populations.”
The study sheds light on important methodological issues that studies of psychedelic effects face. However, the authors note some limitations. For example, the two groups had demographic differences; the general sample was overwhelmingly from the United States, while the enthusiast sample lacked country-of-residence data for most participants (though a portion resided in Sweden). This introduces the possibility of cross-cultural differences influencing the results.
Additionally, it should be noted that the Prolific sample likely included many psychedelic enthusiasts as well. Because of this, the difference between the two groups in this study likely underestimates the true difference between the general population and psychedelic enthusiasts.
The paper, “Selection Bias in Psychedelic Research: Comparing Self-Reported Quality-Of-Life Impact Between Enthusiasts and a General Population Sample,” was authored by Jonathan Bendz, Linus Schäfer, David Sjöström, Sverker Sikström, and Petri Kajonius.
-------------------------------------------------
DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email [email protected] -- no subject or message needed.
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot
NYU Information for Practice puts out 400-500 good quality health-related research posts per week but its too much for many people, so that bot is limited to just subscribers. You can read it or subscribe at @PsychResearchBot
Since 1991 The National Psychologist has focused on keeping practicing psychologists current with news, information and items of interest. Check them out for more free articles, resources, and subscription information: https://www.nationalpsychologist.com
EMAIL DAILY DIGEST OF RSS FEEDS -- SUBSCRIBE: http://subscribe-article-digests.clinicians-exchange.org
READ ONLINE: http://read-the-rss-mega-archive.clinicians-exchange.org
It's primitive... but it works... mostly...
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #Psychedelics #SelectionBias #QualityOfLife #PsychedelicResearch #StudyBias #OpenMindedness #PersonalityTraits #MentalHealthResearch #TherapeuticPsychedelics #ScientificCaution
-
DATE: May 12, 2026 at 10:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------TITLE: Are the benefits of psychedelics exaggerated? A new study highlights the problem of selection bias
A study comparing psychedelic enthusiasts and people from the general population (who also had psychedelic experiences) found that the enthusiasts tended to report much greater positive quality-of-life effects. The enthusiasts also showed higher openness, extraversion, and agreeableness. This indicates that recruitment strategies in psychedelic research that lean towards including enthusiasts may shape the outcomes obtained in those studies. The paper was published in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs.
Psychedelic drugs are substances that can strongly alter perception, mood, thinking, and the sense of self. They may change how people experience colors, sounds, time, memories, emotions, and the meaning of events. Classic psychedelics include LSD, psilocybin from “magic mushrooms,” DMT, and mescaline. These substances mainly act on serotonin receptors in the brain.
In research settings, psychedelics are being studied for possible therapeutic use in conditions such as depression, PTSD, anxiety, and substance use disorders. Their effects depend heavily on dose, personality, expectations, mental state, physical setting, and social support. Psychedelics can also carry risks, including panic, confusion, dangerous behavior during intoxication, worsening of some psychiatric conditions, and legal consequences where they are prohibited.
Study author Jonathan Bendz and his colleagues noted that many studies of psychedelic users report extraordinarily positive self-reported effects. However, they suggest that this might represent an exaggeration of the real effects caused by biased selection, or even self-selection, of study participants. The issue is that the effects of psychedelics can only be tested on individuals who agree to use them. These participants tend to be individuals who have already had especially positive experiences with psychedelic use.
To examine this hypothesis, these researchers conducted a study comparing whether the self-reported quality-of-life impact of psychedelic experiences differed between a convenience sample of psychedelic enthusiasts and a group of people from the general population recruited via Prolific. They also wanted to see whether the difference between the two groups remained after controlling for mindset, setting, motivation to use psychedelic drugs, and personality traits.
The enthusiast group consisted of 583 individuals recruited through an anonymous survey posted on the Facebook and Instagram pages of a Swedish nonprofit organization that disseminates information about psychedelic science (Nätverket för Psykedelisk Vetenskap). A snowball sampling approach was used to reach more participants. The general population group consisted of 599 individuals recruited via Prolific (an online survey platform). They were required to have prior psychedelic experience, but were not recruited from a specific psychedelic community.
Study participants completed assessments of the quality-of-life impact of their psychedelic experiences (e.g., “How has your most meaningful psychedelic experience affected the quality of your relationship with… family, friends, yourself, society, and nature?”). They also answered questions regarding their mindset and physical setting during the experience (“To what extent did you experience your mindset/environment to be optimal?”), their motivation (“What was your motivation for using a psychedelic substance?”), and their personality (using the IPIP-NEO-30 assessment).
Results showed that the psychedelic enthusiasts tended to report a much higher quality-of-life impact from their psychedelic experiences compared to the Prolific group. The enthusiast group also reported having a more optimal mindset and setting during their trips, and they were more likely to report taking the drugs for personal growth rather than for fun. Finally, the enthusiasts tended to be more open to new experiences, extraverted, and agreeable than the participants from the Prolific group.
Even after using a statistical model to account for these differences in personality, mindset, setting, and motivation, simply belonging to the enthusiast group remained the strongest predictor of reporting a high quality-of-life impact.
“As expected, participants recruited from an enthusiast-leaning channel reported considerably greater benefits [of psychedelic use] than those recruited from a general-population platform. Even after controlling for mindset, setting, motivation, and personality, sample membership remained the strongest predictor of quality-of-life impact,” the study authors concluded.
“The persistent effect of sample membership suggests that the two groups differ in additional ways not captured by our measures, for example in cultural expectations, social context, or demographic composition, shaping reported outcomes. These results underscore the need for caution when interpreting findings from psychedelic studies that rely on highly engaged user populations.”
The study sheds light on important methodological issues that studies of psychedelic effects face. However, the authors note some limitations. For example, the two groups had demographic differences; the general sample was overwhelmingly from the United States, while the enthusiast sample lacked country-of-residence data for most participants (though a portion resided in Sweden). This introduces the possibility of cross-cultural differences influencing the results.
Additionally, it should be noted that the Prolific sample likely included many psychedelic enthusiasts as well. Because of this, the difference between the two groups in this study likely underestimates the true difference between the general population and psychedelic enthusiasts.
The paper, “Selection Bias in Psychedelic Research: Comparing Self-Reported Quality-Of-Life Impact Between Enthusiasts and a General Population Sample,” was authored by Jonathan Bendz, Linus Schäfer, David Sjöström, Sverker Sikström, and Petri Kajonius.
-------------------------------------------------
DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email [email protected] -- no subject or message needed.
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot
NYU Information for Practice puts out 400-500 good quality health-related research posts per week but its too much for many people, so that bot is limited to just subscribers. You can read it or subscribe at @PsychResearchBot
Since 1991 The National Psychologist has focused on keeping practicing psychologists current with news, information and items of interest. Check them out for more free articles, resources, and subscription information: https://www.nationalpsychologist.com
EMAIL DAILY DIGEST OF RSS FEEDS -- SUBSCRIBE: http://subscribe-article-digests.clinicians-exchange.org
READ ONLINE: http://read-the-rss-mega-archive.clinicians-exchange.org
It's primitive... but it works... mostly...
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #Psychedelics #SelectionBias #QualityOfLife #PsychedelicResearch #StudyBias #OpenMindedness #PersonalityTraits #MentalHealthResearch #TherapeuticPsychedelics #ScientificCaution
-
DATE: May 12, 2026 at 10:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------TITLE: Are the benefits of psychedelics exaggerated? A new study highlights the problem of selection bias
A study comparing psychedelic enthusiasts and people from the general population (who also had psychedelic experiences) found that the enthusiasts tended to report much greater positive quality-of-life effects. The enthusiasts also showed higher openness, extraversion, and agreeableness. This indicates that recruitment strategies in psychedelic research that lean towards including enthusiasts may shape the outcomes obtained in those studies. The paper was published in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs.
Psychedelic drugs are substances that can strongly alter perception, mood, thinking, and the sense of self. They may change how people experience colors, sounds, time, memories, emotions, and the meaning of events. Classic psychedelics include LSD, psilocybin from “magic mushrooms,” DMT, and mescaline. These substances mainly act on serotonin receptors in the brain.
In research settings, psychedelics are being studied for possible therapeutic use in conditions such as depression, PTSD, anxiety, and substance use disorders. Their effects depend heavily on dose, personality, expectations, mental state, physical setting, and social support. Psychedelics can also carry risks, including panic, confusion, dangerous behavior during intoxication, worsening of some psychiatric conditions, and legal consequences where they are prohibited.
Study author Jonathan Bendz and his colleagues noted that many studies of psychedelic users report extraordinarily positive self-reported effects. However, they suggest that this might represent an exaggeration of the real effects caused by biased selection, or even self-selection, of study participants. The issue is that the effects of psychedelics can only be tested on individuals who agree to use them. These participants tend to be individuals who have already had especially positive experiences with psychedelic use.
To examine this hypothesis, these researchers conducted a study comparing whether the self-reported quality-of-life impact of psychedelic experiences differed between a convenience sample of psychedelic enthusiasts and a group of people from the general population recruited via Prolific. They also wanted to see whether the difference between the two groups remained after controlling for mindset, setting, motivation to use psychedelic drugs, and personality traits.
The enthusiast group consisted of 583 individuals recruited through an anonymous survey posted on the Facebook and Instagram pages of a Swedish nonprofit organization that disseminates information about psychedelic science (Nätverket för Psykedelisk Vetenskap). A snowball sampling approach was used to reach more participants. The general population group consisted of 599 individuals recruited via Prolific (an online survey platform). They were required to have prior psychedelic experience, but were not recruited from a specific psychedelic community.
Study participants completed assessments of the quality-of-life impact of their psychedelic experiences (e.g., “How has your most meaningful psychedelic experience affected the quality of your relationship with… family, friends, yourself, society, and nature?”). They also answered questions regarding their mindset and physical setting during the experience (“To what extent did you experience your mindset/environment to be optimal?”), their motivation (“What was your motivation for using a psychedelic substance?”), and their personality (using the IPIP-NEO-30 assessment).
Results showed that the psychedelic enthusiasts tended to report a much higher quality-of-life impact from their psychedelic experiences compared to the Prolific group. The enthusiast group also reported having a more optimal mindset and setting during their trips, and they were more likely to report taking the drugs for personal growth rather than for fun. Finally, the enthusiasts tended to be more open to new experiences, extraverted, and agreeable than the participants from the Prolific group.
Even after using a statistical model to account for these differences in personality, mindset, setting, and motivation, simply belonging to the enthusiast group remained the strongest predictor of reporting a high quality-of-life impact.
“As expected, participants recruited from an enthusiast-leaning channel reported considerably greater benefits [of psychedelic use] than those recruited from a general-population platform. Even after controlling for mindset, setting, motivation, and personality, sample membership remained the strongest predictor of quality-of-life impact,” the study authors concluded.
“The persistent effect of sample membership suggests that the two groups differ in additional ways not captured by our measures, for example in cultural expectations, social context, or demographic composition, shaping reported outcomes. These results underscore the need for caution when interpreting findings from psychedelic studies that rely on highly engaged user populations.”
The study sheds light on important methodological issues that studies of psychedelic effects face. However, the authors note some limitations. For example, the two groups had demographic differences; the general sample was overwhelmingly from the United States, while the enthusiast sample lacked country-of-residence data for most participants (though a portion resided in Sweden). This introduces the possibility of cross-cultural differences influencing the results.
Additionally, it should be noted that the Prolific sample likely included many psychedelic enthusiasts as well. Because of this, the difference between the two groups in this study likely underestimates the true difference between the general population and psychedelic enthusiasts.
The paper, “Selection Bias in Psychedelic Research: Comparing Self-Reported Quality-Of-Life Impact Between Enthusiasts and a General Population Sample,” was authored by Jonathan Bendz, Linus Schäfer, David Sjöström, Sverker Sikström, and Petri Kajonius.
-------------------------------------------------
DAILY EMAIL DIGEST: Email [email protected] -- no subject or message needed.
Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org
Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot
NYU Information for Practice puts out 400-500 good quality health-related research posts per week but its too much for many people, so that bot is limited to just subscribers. You can read it or subscribe at @PsychResearchBot
Since 1991 The National Psychologist has focused on keeping practicing psychologists current with news, information and items of interest. Check them out for more free articles, resources, and subscription information: https://www.nationalpsychologist.com
EMAIL DAILY DIGEST OF RSS FEEDS -- SUBSCRIBE: http://subscribe-article-digests.clinicians-exchange.org
READ ONLINE: http://read-the-rss-mega-archive.clinicians-exchange.org
It's primitive... but it works... mostly...
-------------------------------------------------
#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #Psychedelics #SelectionBias #QualityOfLife #PsychedelicResearch #StudyBias #OpenMindedness #PersonalityTraits #MentalHealthResearch #TherapeuticPsychedelics #ScientificCaution
-
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-887917
Classic example of #badjournalism #journalism
#selectionbias + #multitestingbias + #aihype
One would assume that journalists nowadays are still educated individuals and that they get a basic #statistics class, as part of their professional education.
Sure, come back to us when #grok predicts the lottery numbers reliably for 3 months; we are all interested in THAT prompt.
-
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-887917
Classic example of #badjournalism #journalism
#selectionbias + #multitestingbias + #aihype
One would assume that journalists nowadays are still educated individuals and that they get a basic #statistics class, as part of their professional education.
Sure, come back to us when #grok predicts the lottery numbers reliably for 3 months; we are all interested in THAT prompt.
-
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-887917
Classic example of #badjournalism #journalism
#selectionbias + #multitestingbias + #aihype
One would assume that journalists nowadays are still educated individuals and that they get a basic #statistics class, as part of their professional education.
Sure, come back to us when #grok predicts the lottery numbers reliably for 3 months; we are all interested in THAT prompt.
-
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-887917
Classic example of #badjournalism #journalism
#selectionbias + #multitestingbias + #aihype
One would assume that journalists nowadays are still educated individuals and that they get a basic #statistics class, as part of their professional education.
Sure, come back to us when #grok predicts the lottery numbers reliably for 3 months; we are all interested in THAT prompt.
-
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-887917
Classic example of #badjournalism #journalism
#selectionbias + #multitestingbias + #aihype
One would assume that journalists nowadays are still educated individuals and that they get a basic #statistics class, as part of their professional education.
Sure, come back to us when #grok predicts the lottery numbers reliably for 3 months; we are all interested in THAT prompt.
-
You have a workshop about how to deal with a specific problem. Why would you be surprised if most people in the audience have experienced the problem before? #SelectionBias
-
You have a workshop about how to deal with a specific problem. Why would you be surprised if most people in the audience have experienced the problem before? #SelectionBias
-
You have a workshop about how to deal with a specific problem. Why would you be surprised if most people in the audience have experienced the problem before? #SelectionBias
-
You have a workshop about how to deal with a specific problem. Why would you be surprised if most people in the audience have experienced the problem before? #SelectionBias
-
You have a workshop about how to deal with a specific problem. Why would you be surprised if most people in the audience have experienced the problem before? #SelectionBias
-
@destatis bei der Statistik zweifel ich mindestens so lange, bis ich eine Übersicht zum Alter der Umfragenteilnehmer gesehen habe und ausschließen kann dass hier MASSIVER #selectionBias vorliegt
so… wir haben "Haushalte" postalisch befragt und Rentner haben 90% der Antwortbriefe verfasst
-
@destatis bei der Statistik zweifel ich mindestens so lange, bis ich eine Übersicht zum Alter der Umfragenteilnehmer gesehen habe und ausschließen kann dass hier MASSIVER #selectionBias vorliegt
so… wir haben "Haushalte" postalisch befragt und Rentner haben 90% der Antwortbriefe verfasst
-
@destatis bei der Statistik zweifel ich mindestens so lange, bis ich eine Übersicht zum Alter der Umfragenteilnehmer gesehen habe und ausschließen kann dass hier MASSIVER #selectionBias vorliegt
so… wir haben "Haushalte" postalisch befragt und Rentner haben 90% der Antwortbriefe verfasst
-
@destatis bei der Statistik zweifel ich mindestens so lange, bis ich eine Übersicht zum Alter der Umfragenteilnehmer gesehen habe und ausschließen kann dass hier MASSIVER #selectionBias vorliegt
so… wir haben "Haushalte" postalisch befragt und Rentner haben 90% der Antwortbriefe verfasst
-
@destatis bei der Statistik zweifel ich mindestens so lange, bis ich eine Übersicht zum Alter der Umfragenteilnehmer gesehen habe und ausschließen kann dass hier MASSIVER #selectionBias vorliegt
so… wir haben "Haushalte" postalisch befragt und Rentner haben 90% der Antwortbriefe verfasst
-
Ensure objectivity of your #QualitativeResearch by tackling researcher bias head-on!
This sneaky bias, fueled by personal beliefs and expectations, can skew your data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Key culprits include #SelectionBias, #ConfirmationBias, #InterpretationBias, and #ReportingBias. Boost your research integrity with strategies like #Reflexivity, #PeerDebriefing, #Triangulation, #MemberChecking, and #AuditTrail.
https://qdacity.com/researcher-bias/
#ResearcherBias #QDAcity #QDA #Student -
Ensure objectivity of your #QualitativeResearch by tackling researcher bias head-on!
This sneaky bias, fueled by personal beliefs and expectations, can skew your data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Key culprits include #SelectionBias, #ConfirmationBias, #InterpretationBias, and #ReportingBias. Boost your research integrity with strategies like #Reflexivity, #PeerDebriefing, #Triangulation, #MemberChecking, and #AuditTrail.
https://qdacity.com/researcher-bias/
#ResearcherBias #QDAcity #QDA #Student -
@bmi 95% der Bürger die die Umfrage zum Warntag ausgefüllt haben?
Leute die den Warntag nicht mitbekommen haben, haben sicher die Umfrage auch nicht gesehen.
#selectionBias ick hör dir trappsen!
-
@bmi 95% der Bürger die die Umfrage zum Warntag ausgefüllt haben?
Leute die den Warntag nicht mitbekommen haben, haben sicher die Umfrage auch nicht gesehen.
#selectionBias ick hör dir trappsen!
-
@bmi 95% der Bürger die die Umfrage zum Warntag ausgefüllt haben?
Leute die den Warntag nicht mitbekommen haben, haben sicher die Umfrage auch nicht gesehen.
#selectionBias ick hör dir trappsen!
-
@bmi 95% der Bürger die die Umfrage zum Warntag ausgefüllt haben?
Leute die den Warntag nicht mitbekommen haben, haben sicher die Umfrage auch nicht gesehen.
#selectionBias ick hör dir trappsen!
-
@bmi 95% der Bürger die die Umfrage zum Warntag ausgefüllt haben?
Leute die den Warntag nicht mitbekommen haben, haben sicher die Umfrage auch nicht gesehen.
#selectionBias ick hör dir trappsen!
-
@ricebox #SelectionBias? If the shops and cafés you've visited recently keep playing the cum dump song, this might be because of the shops and cafés you go to. :bunhdthinking:
-
@ricebox #SelectionBias? If the shops and cafés you've visited recently keep playing the cum dump song, this might be because of the shops and cafés you go to. :bunhdthinking:
-
How can advocacy for a search engine monopoly be reduced (by practical editorial changes) in the English-language #Wikipedia?
This is a fundamental meta-academic question (reviews of knowledge) for which practical participation - with evidence and arguments - would be better than postmodernist gobbledegook or neoliberal empty rhetoric.
-
How can advocacy for a search engine monopoly be reduced (by practical editorial changes) in the English-language #Wikipedia?
This is a fundamental meta-academic question (reviews of knowledge) for which practical participation - with evidence and arguments - would be better than postmodernist gobbledegook or neoliberal empty rhetoric.
-
How can advocacy for a search engine monopoly be reduced (by practical editorial changes) in the English-language #Wikipedia?
This is a fundamental meta-academic question (reviews of knowledge) for which practical participation - with evidence and arguments - would be better than postmodernist gobbledegook or neoliberal empty rhetoric.
-
How can advocacy for a search engine monopoly be reduced (by practical editorial changes) in the English-language #Wikipedia?
This is a fundamental meta-academic question (reviews of knowledge) for which practical participation - with evidence and arguments - would be better than postmodernist gobbledegook or neoliberal empty rhetoric.
-
How can advocacy for a search engine monopoly be reduced (by practical editorial changes) in the English-language #Wikipedia?
This is a fundamental meta-academic question (reviews of knowledge) for which practical participation - with evidence and arguments - would be better than postmodernist gobbledegook or neoliberal empty rhetoric.
-
Yes, it's lovely to see the Tories getting their arses handed to them on a plate in #Tamworth and #MidBedfordshire, but let's not get too carried away. You can't easily extrapolate from by-elections with low turnouts to what might happen in a general election. No time for complacency.
-
Yes, it's lovely to see the Tories getting their arses handed to them on a plate in #Tamworth and #MidBedfordshire, but let's not get too carried away. You can't easily extrapolate from by-elections with low turnouts to what might happen in a general election. No time for complacency.
-
Yes, it's lovely to see the Tories getting their arses handed to them on a plate in #Tamworth and #MidBedfordshire, but let's not get too carried away. You can't easily extrapolate from by-elections with low turnouts to what might happen in a general election. No time for complacency.
-
Yes, it's lovely to see the Tories getting their arses handed to them on a plate in #Tamworth and #MidBedfordshire, but let's not get too carried away. You can't easily extrapolate from by-elections with low turnouts to what might happen in a general election. No time for complacency.
-
Yes, it's lovely to see the Tories getting their arses handed to them on a plate in #Tamworth and #MidBedfordshire, but let's not get too carried away. You can't easily extrapolate from by-elections with low turnouts to what might happen in a general election. No time for complacency.
-
Tell us you don't know how to do #math without saying it.
In an amusing twist of #SelectionBias, the death rates were 11% lower than even pre #COVID normal life expectancy for vaccinated people. Probably because people who take #vaccines tend to be more informed about #health #risk.
The #death rate for unvaccinated people was 93% higher than the pre-COVID ones. The risk profile of people who don't have the skills to "do their own #research" is frankly #insane.
More in comments:
-
Tell us you don't know how to do #math without saying it.
In an amusing twist of #SelectionBias, the death rates were 11% lower than even pre #COVID normal life expectancy for vaccinated people. Probably because people who take #vaccines tend to be more informed about #health #risk.
The #death rate for unvaccinated people was 93% higher than the pre-COVID ones. The risk profile of people who don't have the skills to "do their own #research" is frankly #insane.
More in comments:
-
Tell us you don't know how to do #math without saying it.
In an amusing twist of #SelectionBias, the death rates were 11% lower than even pre #COVID normal life expectancy for vaccinated people. Probably because people who take #vaccines tend to be more informed about #health #risk.
The #death rate for unvaccinated people was 93% higher than the pre-COVID ones. The risk profile of people who don't have the skills to "do their own #research" is frankly #insane.
More in comments:
-
Tell us you don't know how to do #math without saying it.
In an amusing twist of #SelectionBias, the death rates were 11% lower than even pre #COVID normal life expectancy for vaccinated people. Probably because people who take #vaccines tend to be more informed about #health #risk.
The #death rate for unvaccinated people was 93% higher than the pre-COVID ones. The risk profile of people who don't have the skills to "do their own #research" is frankly #insane.
More in comments:
-
Tell us you don't know how to do #math without saying it.
In an amusing twist of #SelectionBias, the death rates were 11% lower than even pre #COVID normal life expectancy for vaccinated people. Probably because people who take #vaccines tend to be more informed about #health #risk.
The #death rate for unvaccinated people was 93% higher than the pre-COVID ones. The risk profile of people who don't have the skills to "do their own #research" is frankly #insane.
More in comments:
-
@c_ozwei Ich habe in den vergangenen Monaten einige Entscheidungsträger·innen auf lokaler Ebene getroffen, Bürgermeister, Bzeirksvorsteher, Verwaltung, ... Und ich habe immer den Eindruck gehabt, dass das Verständnis für die #Klimakrise vorhanden ist.
Aber es ist mir bewußt, daß es einen starken (beidseitigen) #SelectionBias gibt, wer sich mit mir auf ein Gespräch übers #Klima zusammensetzen möchte...
-
@c_ozwei Ich habe in den vergangenen Monaten einige Entscheidungsträger·innen auf lokaler Ebene getroffen, Bürgermeister, Bzeirksvorsteher, Verwaltung, ... Und ich habe immer den Eindruck gehabt, dass das Verständnis für die #Klimakrise vorhanden ist.
Aber es ist mir bewußt, daß es einen starken (beidseitigen) #SelectionBias gibt, wer sich mit mir auf ein Gespräch übers #Klima zusammensetzen möchte...
-
@c_ozwei Ich habe in den vergangenen Monaten einige Entscheidungsträger·innen auf lokaler Ebene getroffen, Bürgermeister, Bzeirksvorsteher, Verwaltung, ... Und ich habe immer den Eindruck gehabt, dass das Verständnis für die #Klimakrise vorhanden ist.
Aber es ist mir bewußt, daß es einen starken (beidseitigen) #SelectionBias gibt, wer sich mit mir auf ein Gespräch übers #Klima zusammensetzen möchte...
-
@c_ozwei Ich habe in den vergangenen Monaten einige Entscheidungsträger·innen auf lokaler Ebene getroffen, Bürgermeister, Bzeirksvorsteher, Verwaltung, ... Und ich habe immer den Eindruck gehabt, dass das Verständnis für die #Klimakrise vorhanden ist.
Aber es ist mir bewußt, daß es einen starken (beidseitigen) #SelectionBias gibt, wer sich mit mir auf ein Gespräch übers #Klima zusammensetzen möchte...
-
@c_ozwei Ich habe in den vergangenen Monaten einige Entscheidungsträger·innen auf lokaler Ebene getroffen, Bürgermeister, Bzeirksvorsteher, Verwaltung, ... Und ich habe immer den Eindruck gehabt, dass das Verständnis für die #Klimakrise vorhanden ist.
Aber es ist mir bewußt, daß es einen starken (beidseitigen) #SelectionBias gibt, wer sich mit mir auf ein Gespräch übers #Klima zusammensetzen möchte...
-
New Portuguese-Language pages created on #RationalWiki in July:
#Português #PortugueseApelo à fé #appealtofaith #logicalfallacy #FaláciaLógica
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Apelo_%C3%A0_f%C3%A9#TDK (acrônimo para Tirei Do Ku) #PIDOOMA
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/TDKViés de sobrevivência #survivorshipbias
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Vi%C3%A9s_de_sobreviv%C3%AAnciaViés de seleção #selectionbias
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Vi%C3%A9s_de_sele%C3%A7%C3%A3oEvidência suprimida #cherrypicking
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evid%C3%AAncia_suprimidaFalácia do holofote #spotlightfallacy
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fal%C3%A1cia_do_holofoteTeoria da cegueira deliberada #willfulignorance #denialism
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Teoria_da_cegueira_deliberadaPost hoc, ergo propter hoc #posthocergopropterhoc
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Post_hoc,_ergo_propter_hoc_(portugu%C3%AAs)Superstição #Superstition
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Supersti%C3%A7%C3%A3o -
New Portuguese-Language pages created on #RationalWiki in July:
#Português #PortugueseApelo à fé #appealtofaith #logicalfallacy #FaláciaLógica
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Apelo_%C3%A0_f%C3%A9#TDK (acrônimo para Tirei Do Ku) #PIDOOMA
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/TDKViés de sobrevivência #survivorshipbias
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Vi%C3%A9s_de_sobreviv%C3%AAnciaViés de seleção #selectionbias
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Vi%C3%A9s_de_sele%C3%A7%C3%A3oEvidência suprimida #cherrypicking
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evid%C3%AAncia_suprimidaFalácia do holofote #spotlightfallacy
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fal%C3%A1cia_do_holofoteTeoria da cegueira deliberada #willfulignorance #denialism
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Teoria_da_cegueira_deliberadaPost hoc, ergo propter hoc #posthocergopropterhoc
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Post_hoc,_ergo_propter_hoc_(portugu%C3%AAs)Superstição #Superstition
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Supersti%C3%A7%C3%A3o -
New Portuguese-Language pages created on #RationalWiki in July:
#Português #PortugueseApelo à fé #appealtofaith #logicalfallacy #FaláciaLógica
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Apelo_%C3%A0_f%C3%A9#TDK (acrônimo para Tirei Do Ku) #PIDOOMA
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/TDKViés de sobrevivência #survivorshipbias
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Vi%C3%A9s_de_sobreviv%C3%AAnciaViés de seleção #selectionbias
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Vi%C3%A9s_de_sele%C3%A7%C3%A3oEvidência suprimida #cherrypicking
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evid%C3%AAncia_suprimidaFalácia do holofote #spotlightfallacy
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fal%C3%A1cia_do_holofoteTeoria da cegueira deliberada #willfulignorance #denialism
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Teoria_da_cegueira_deliberadaPost hoc, ergo propter hoc #posthocergopropterhoc
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Post_hoc,_ergo_propter_hoc_(portugu%C3%AAs)Superstição #Superstition
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Supersti%C3%A7%C3%A3o