 |
 |
> On May 12, 2018, at 12:57 PM, Don Norman <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Scientists look for statistical significance, which does not mean practical > significance. Statistical significance means it is not likely to have > occurred by chance, but it may be a small effect. I’m often impressed that people find statistical significance so, well, significant. If I assume that the study is correct and I do something expensive, uncomfortable, or distasteful, I can reduce the minuscule chance of a given threat by a minuscule amount. Don’s point about designers wanting big changes is important. It means that we should avoid the sort of statistically-related logic errors Don catalogs; I think, however, it may undermine the notion that we should all become actuaries. (That’s not to say that we shouldn’t all become people who know when to call an actuary--or some flavor of statistician or an accountant or a pathologist or an attorney.) Something about design and the sort of statistically-adjacent stuff Don mentioned: https://slate.com/technology/2018/05/health-apps-like-headspace-are-hard-to-study-because-we-cant-make-good-placebo-apps.html Gunnar Gunnar Swanson East Carolina University graphic design program http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graphic/index.cfm [log in to unmask] Gunnar Swanson Design Office 1901 East 6th Street Greenville NC 27858 USA http://www.gunnarswanson.com [log in to unmask] +1 252 258-7006 ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design -----------------------------------------------------------------