- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Study: Same-Sex Parenting Harms Children
Posted on 9/1/17 at 12:41 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 9/1/17 at 12:41 pm to RollTide1987
Interesting findings.
I'm curious if I would consider 20 to be a large enough sample size to truly consider it scientific, especially considering that only 3 were gay couples. I mean, one might infer that it is specifically lesbian couples that are bad for children.
Also, reading over the entire article, there's a lot of flawed logic and methodologies utilized.
It should also be noted that the person making the claim did not actually conduct the study themselves.
With only 20, a comparison of 37% to 7% could easily be a statistical anomaly. If 2 kids less have suicidal thoughts (the numbers I'm referencing), then the number drops from 37% to 25%. When the sample size is this small, it only takes a couple of deviations to skew the numbers drastically in one direction or another.
I'm not saying that the point they're attempting to make is correct or incorrect; I'm pointing out that the methodology and science used is terribly flawed.
This will only gain traction because people will use it to confirm previously held beliefs, but it honestly doesn't prove anything on its own. Additional, more thorough studies are needed for that.
I'm curious if I would consider 20 to be a large enough sample size to truly consider it scientific, especially considering that only 3 were gay couples. I mean, one might infer that it is specifically lesbian couples that are bad for children.
Also, reading over the entire article, there's a lot of flawed logic and methodologies utilized.
It should also be noted that the person making the claim did not actually conduct the study themselves.
With only 20, a comparison of 37% to 7% could easily be a statistical anomaly. If 2 kids less have suicidal thoughts (the numbers I'm referencing), then the number drops from 37% to 25%. When the sample size is this small, it only takes a couple of deviations to skew the numbers drastically in one direction or another.
I'm not saying that the point they're attempting to make is correct or incorrect; I'm pointing out that the methodology and science used is terribly flawed.
This will only gain traction because people will use it to confirm previously held beliefs, but it honestly doesn't prove anything on its own. Additional, more thorough studies are needed for that.
Posted on 9/1/17 at 1:14 pm to skrayper
quote:20 wouldn't be a sufficient sample for any single random variable randomly drawn from a population (e.g., flipping a coin 20 times). The rule of thumb from the Law of Large Numbers is a minimum of a sample size of 30 as a lower bound to approximate to the variable's probability distribution. And that is under those perfect conditions, for a single variable to approximate to the likelihood.
I'm curious if I would consider 20 to be a large enough sample size to truly consider it scientific, especially considering that only 3 were gay couples.
When you start talking about variability and statistical significance then the sample size will need to be much larger. Then considering imperfect sampling and modeling multiple known variables, then the need increases. And since they are likely to be a number of other variables that can't be controlled for, it needs to be even larger.
In other words, the sample size would need to he factors larger to even consider it a representation of population phenomenon and drawing conclusions.
In my opinion, this Study should never have been published in a peer-reviewed journal, even if it was studying something trivial, let alone something that is based on something that is already controversial, especially since it was the sole focus.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News