Gaydar is real

[zoiks]

Originally posted by: BlackTigers

Originally posted by: Injury
http://www.broadcaster.com/clip/6237

omg lol

I love 'The Office'.

 

[illusion88]

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: illusion88

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: bignateyk

Originally posted by: sdifox
err, just pure guessing would statistically get you more than 50% right.

How so?

There are more straight men than gay men.

read the article

was not commenting on their method, rather their conclusion.

No you weren't. You said "There are more straight men than gay men". Which has nothing to do with 15 peoples ability to detect someones sexual orientation in 50 milliseconds.

You were saying that there are more strait men than gay men which is actually untrue. In the study there were 90 pictures, 45 of them of gay men, 45 of them of straight men. So in fact there were and equal amount of gay and straight men shown to the 15 people who took the test. So "pure guessing" would net about 50% accuracy.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: illusion88

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: illusion88

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: bignateyk

Originally posted by: sdifox
err, just pure guessing would statistically get you more than 50% right.

How so?

There are more straight men than gay men.

read the article

was not commenting on their method, rather their conclusion.

No you weren't. You said "There are more straight men than gay men". Which has nothing to do with 15 peoples ability to detect someones sexual orientation in 50 milliseconds.

You were saying that there are more strait men than gay men which is actually untrue. In the study there were 90 pictures, 45 of them of gay men, 45 of them of straight men. So in fact there were and equal amount of gay and straight men shown to the 15 people who took the test. So "pure guessing" would net about 50% accuracy.

subjects could accurately determine in 50 milliseconds ? one-twentieth of a second ? whether the men were gay or straight about 60 percent of the time

That is what I was commenting on. Not on how they setup the pictures. In the real world, there are more straight men than gay men. Unless you want to dispute that.

 

[Aikouka]

My old roommate had this Gaydar on his palm pilot... he always pointed it at me and it said I was gay (of course it said everyone was gay).

 

[jonks]

who needs a study to tell them that gaydar is real?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT4XO3Hjp7M

do you really need a picture of this guy on his knees for proof?

 

[Baked]

Just so you know, only gay people have gaydar.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Baked
Just so you know, only gay people have gaydar.

yep. and people with eyes. but that's it.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Injury
Because there is a 50/50 chance of probability of "gay" or "not gay"... it's like answering false on all questions on a true false quiz when you didn't study... unless the teacher decides to throw a curve ball, probability says that you'll get half of them correct.

If they used 50% pictures of gay people and 50% pictures of straight people, and if you said that all of the people in the pictures were gay, you'd be 50% correct.

If they went with a more real-life scenario of 75% straight and 25% gay, then you'd be 75% correct if you guessed all of them were straight.

The study was really a guessing game. When people get 50-70% of them correct, then it's usually safe to chalk that one up to coincidence.


Not to mention that merely showing photographs of people is hardly a scientific way to make a study like this.

This is true. But only if you failed statistics.

Originally posted by: illusion88
The real problem with the study isn't it's method, it's the fact that they are drawing this conclusion after testing only 15 students.

Statistical methods required for this sort of publication account for the number of observations. If the data indicate that there is a statistically significant difference with only 15 people, then the data are pretty consistent.

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Injury
Because there is a 50/50 chance of probability of "gay" or "not gay"... it's like answering false on all questions on a true false quiz when you didn't study... unless the teacher decides to throw a curve ball, probability says that you'll get half of them correct.

If they used 50% pictures of gay people and 50% pictures of straight people, and if you said that all of the people in the pictures were gay, you'd be 50% correct.

If they went with a more real-life scenario of 75% straight and 25% gay, then you'd be 75% correct if you guessed all of them were straight.

The study was really a guessing game. When people get 50-70% of them correct, then it's usually safe to chalk that one up to coincidence.


Not to mention that merely showing photographs of people is hardly a scientific way to make a study like this.

This is true. But only if you failed statistics.

Your explanation about simple factors of probability and how it relates to me be wrong is completely mind-blowing and I can't possibly believe, with the overwhelming response you so diligently typed out, that I even said that in the first place.

That is what I could have said if you had actually decided to explain your reasoning and why you seem to think correlation = causation. But in reality, a test group of 15 subjects, while meeting the minimum number required for an fair pool of data, could coincidentally guess correctly 55-70 percent of the time. There are too many outside factors that could influence this. Is the person guessing gay or straight? Are the people they are guessing about all wearing the same clothing? Are the gay ones dressed flamboyantly? Are the straight ones dressed in a real tough guy manner? The point I'm making is that the very first line of this article ("Not only does "gaydar" exist, suggests a study out of Tufts University, but it can work pretty fast.") is just taking data and implying that the concept behind it is infallible. The only thing this does is show that one of the following is true: Either a group of people had sheer dumb luck, or the sample of pictures had some people with stereotypical gay styles/mannerisms.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Injury
Your explanation about simple factors of probability and how it relates to me be wrong is completely mind-blowing and I can't possibly believe, with the overwhelming response you so diligently typed out, that I even said that in the first place.

said if you had actually decided to explain your reasoning and why you seem to think correlation = causation.

This is ATOT, not a classroom. If you want a statistics lesson, you're going to have to get in line and pay for it like all the other rich kids that pay my salary.

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Injury
Your explanation about simple factors of probability and how it relates to me be wrong is completely mind-blowing and I can't possibly believe, with the overwhelming response you so diligently typed out, that I even said that in the first place.

http://could have</"> sa...rrelation = causation.

This is ATOT, not a classroom. If you want a statistics lesson, you're going to have to get in line and pay for it like all the other rich kids that pay my salary.

Which is another way of saying you're just saying shit to say it.

 

[LeadMagnet]

tag

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Injury
Which is another way of saying you're just saying shit to say it.

No, it means I understand what I'm talking about enough for students to pay $100 per lecture for me to tell them about it. Try to keep up. Get back to me when you figure out what a T-test is and how it might apply to the current topic.

 

[Platypus]

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT

 

[queenrobot]

I thought you could buy Gaydar at The Sharper Image?

 

[fishjie]

im gonna guess this kid is gay

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: queenrobot
I thought you could buy Gaydar at The Sharper Image?

*checks website*
Ah, they must be out of stock.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: fishjie
im gonna guess this kid is gay

nope, just a d-bag

 

[nonameo]

Hmmm... I wonder if there are individuals that set off gaydar more consistently. That would be more interesting IMO. edit: and accurately.

IOW:

60% of gaydar pings come out correct.

but 1 source pings back with 90% accuracy.