4G Networks Tested: WiMAX vs. HSPA+
Top message: Dumb conclusions by tbacba
Replying to: Sure, you *could* skew the numbers. We didn't. by Rich Brome
Re: Sure, you *could* skew the numbers. We didn't.
Rich Borne,
I agree with you that in order to perform your "tests" in a "fair" manner you must include all of your data. However, I believe that your "empirical" conclusions are still biased. Your outlier, in this case location F, significantly affects your data which arguably flaws your conclusion. In order to reduce the significance of these anomalies, your sample should be much larger. Because of your small sample producing skewed results the only conclusions people can draw will be either false, or that your data is misleading. It is unfortunate that a usually credible news source is, and will, wrongly influence readers with this misleading comparison. I hope that your testing techniques will improve going forward.
Sincerely,
Chippewas86
I agree with you that in order to perform your "tests" in a "fair" manner you must include all of your data. However, I believe that your "empirical" conclusions are still biased. Your outlier, in this case location F, significantly affects your data which arguably flaws your conclusion. In order to reduce the significance of these anomalies, your sample should be much larger. Because of your small sample producing skewed results the only conclusions people can draw will be either false, or that your data is misleading. It is unfortunate that a usually credible news source is, and will, wrongly influence readers with this misleading comparison. I hope that your testing techniques will improve going forward.
Sincerely,
Chippewas86
Replies
- Re: Sure, you *could* skew the numbers. We didn't. by P-TRIZZ2931
- misleading... how? by Rich Brome
- Re: misleading... how? by Kayslay34
