Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (66852)	12/16/1999 3:03:00 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

You are right, impossible to do a double blind. And you would need a 20 - 30 year follow up. <<They can't randomly select a pool of families, and tell one set to spank, and one set not to spank, >> Now they could find spankers and non spankers and compare but spankers might have a slightly different genetic make up and different conditions to live in than the non spankers.

To: Ilaine who wrote (66852)	12/16/1999 5:51:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Without setting up a random, double-blind study, you can never say with complete authority that the pool of parents who spank don't differ significantly from the pool of parents who don't spank There are many things which we claim to be true without needing to set up double blind studies. For example, posit the question "is it true or false that wives who shoot their husbands in the heads five times with 38 caliber or larger handguns tend to injure them more seriously than wives who throw nerf balls at their husbands? We can't set up an experiment to have wives shoot their husbands, but I think very few researchers, ethical or not, would have much trouble answering the question "beyond any reasonable doubt, it's true." The spanking issue is certainly not as obvious as this one. But the proposition that you have to have a double blind study to have resonable certainty about the consequences of human behaviors is a fallacy.