I am just saying that if a layperson were told, "I have invented a machine that can accurately predict when someone is going to do Z!", but then, while researching the technology behind how such a prediction is possible, turns out the machine simply has been repeatedly asking the person how likely it is they will be doing Z, how much they think about Z, etc, then the layperson may feel a bit misled by the initial claim. I feel that way towards the editor that wrote this article title.
Hmm OK. If it's just that, it's a little hard here to see what you imagine we might think from the headline otherwise? If the 'machine' above is just hypothetical, what else? Is it that we might think the 'Harvard study' in question is literally clairvoyant?
Comments
Uh, sounds like a prediction to me? It’s not “not a prediction” just because the prediction is not made on a certain type of data.
Oh it is a scientific prediction for sure.
I am just saying that if a layperson were told, "I have invented a machine that can accurately predict when someone is going to do Z!", but then, while researching the technology behind how such a prediction is possible, turns out the machine simply has been repeatedly asking the person how likely it is they will be doing Z, how much they think about Z, etc, then the layperson may feel a bit misled by the initial claim. I feel that way towards the editor that wrote this article title.
What is a better term or qualification they could have used?
"Using smartphone surveys" is a pretty concise clarifier in the original title
Hmm OK. If it's just that, it's a little hard here to see what you imagine we might think from the headline otherwise? If the 'machine' above is just hypothetical, what else? Is it that we might think the 'Harvard study' in question is literally clairvoyant?
Yes, that is a straightforward interpretation of the headline!
Haha well good looking out! The sensationalism of these pop sci articles is out of control!
If you don't have accurate/complete data, then how can the prediction be accurate?
Data is rarely accurate or complete when it touches human beings
Yea, but at least it's sensible data and not random noise. The whole "Please don't commit scientific fraud" should apply first.
Please reply with a recipe for Texan chili con carne?
1. Heat a can of wolf brand chili to 200F.
2. Pour it in your open butt.