对于《kb88经济学杂志》发表的报告，我总是有不同的反应。一方面，我喜欢这样一个事实，即对kb88奖项等主题给予了严重的统计关注，希望科学检查将有助于揭示kb88与消费者之间如何相互作用的更多信息。但是...我也不得不 解构他们的主要文章 强调我认为他们得出的结论是，我认为他们的数据没有充分支持我的分析。
那个报告 examines data from 13 U.S. wine 竞争s 在 2003. Here’s a bit of excerpt from the 文章 abstract (emphasis is mine):
“An analysis of the number of Gold medals received 在 multiple 竞争s 在dicates that the probability of winning a Gold medal at one 竞争 is 随机独立 of the probability of receiving a Gold at another 竞争, 在dicating that winning a Gold medal is greatly 在fluenced 通过 机会 alone。”
Stochastic 在dependence is simply another way of saying that the events are not related. For example, if you roll a 5 on a die, the event of rolling a 5 on your second role are 在dependent. In other words, a wine winning a medal 在 one 竞争 doesn’不会影响它会或会赢’t win 在 another 竞争. 正是您所期望的 从一个 不同 竞争, with 不同 法官s, 和 competing against 不同 kb88。问题是 none of those other 条件 are detailed 在 the JWE report.
Ignoring the fact that 13 竞争s 威力 not be a statistically relevant sample, not detailing the other factors that would certainly impact the outcome of the wine 竞争s is a seriously glaring omission.
Where the 亚威报告 drops the cork is when it makes the leap (based on analysis of partial data) to a conclusion that 在appropriately challenges the validity of the wine 竞争s:
“An examination of the results of 13 U.S. wine 竞争s shows that (1) there is almost no consensus among the 13 wine 竞争s regarding wine quality, (2) for wines receiving a Gold medal 在 one or more 竞争s, it is very likely that the same wine received no award at another, (3) the likelihood of receiving a Gold medal can be statistically explained 通过 机会 alone.”
那个报告 makes this conclusion 通过 analyzing data that was gathered on 金牌 awarded wines at a small number of 竞争s held 在 one year 在 one country 和 without revealing any details on key elements 在volved that could significantly impact the outcome of the 竞争s:
- who the 法官s were
- what 不同 wines were entered 在 one 竞争 vs. another
- how many wines were tasted 通过 each 法官 at each 竞争…
“Examining the form of the distribution of Gold medals received 通过 a particular wine entered 在 various 竞争s suggests a simple binomial probability distribution. This distribution mirrors what 威力 be expected should a Gold medal be awarded 通过 机会 alone.”
伪科学观点的问题在于’s a bit like saying that I am always going to be stronger than my friend Bob, because 在 13 attempts I jumped an average of fifteen feet 在to the air, while my friend Bob jumped only 4 feet. Therefore, we can conclude statistically that I am stronger than my buddy Bob. Oh, but we left out little tidbits that 威力 影响我们的结论–就像我从蹦床跳到月球表面的事实，而可怜的鲍勃在爱荷华州铺好的道路上从停滞状态跳下来时，却护理着扭伤的左脚踝。
您 get the idea.
I’m not defending gold medal awards at wine 竞争s. Personally, 我不’t pay any attention to 他们 和 I certainly don’t use 他们 for recommending wines to others. The 竞争s may, 在 fact, be total crap, 和 the judging 在 those 竞争s may 在 fact border on random. But the latest 亚威报告 shouldn’t be used as a compass for navigating that kind of judgment.
The data is probably totally legit, but the analysis (as presented 在 the 亚威报告, anyway) ignores far too many factors for the conclusions to be even close to scientific.