• arcine@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    50 people is an irrelevant sample size. Just because the findings seem to make sense doesn’t mean the study is good.

    • Don Piano@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      No, it’s not. Standard error of the mean estimate is SD/sqrt(n-1), so it depends on the signal/effect to noise ratio how much you can learn from it. SE of the mean difference for a between subjects design is slightly different but not miles off from that. You can squeeze even more info out of it by using within subjects designs.

      What makes you think a sample size of 50 is irrelevant?

    • IratePirate@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Hey there, fella! If the findings confirm my biases, sample size is irrelevant. Science has spoken! /s