Status Updates From Quirkology: The Curious Sci...

Okay good lmao he is currently admitting that subliminal messages in media have little to no statistically significant effect

The problem here is that the "studies" he's referencing don't take into account things like

Sometimes I'm too lazy to change the channel but also don't want to turn off the TV and I enjoy background noise when I'm doing other stuff so yeah if I watched a movie I may just continue letting the channel run regardless of whatever subliminal messages they added

I do not think it's irrational to think that saving $15 on a $20 purchase is a better deal than saving $15 on a $2000 purchase actually

Like yes either way you're saving $15 but I'm not waiting a whole day to save $15 on an already large purchase the time I have to wait to save that small amount on a big purchase is a factor actually

And the next study he's talking about is both terribly designed and has a massive drop out rate

He also keeps using "study" to mean "annoying thing I did on a whim and didn't have to get an ethics board to approve"

I don't like the way this guy talks about studies as though they're infalliable. Particularly when they're his own studies

The thing is the thing he's talking about here is real (memory is demonstrably malleable and unreliable) it's just the studies he's citing are either unethical or insufficient to use as evidence of statistically significant trends

So I'm just pissed off about it

Where's the Zoidberg meme

Yknow

Your sample size is small, your standard deviation is high, your conclusion means nothing, and you should feel bad

Every study he cites could be responded to with that