I have noticed that. . . <snip> . . .what would cause this effect? :?
Hi Laura, from a fellow newbie Nebraskan!
I've snipped your question, because it highlights a potential problem. You have made an observation (informally, I'm guessing - over how long a period of time?) and based on that observation you have decided that there
must be an "effect" or mechanism at work. There
may be, but there are several assumptions at work in your question:
1) Your observations are valid
2) Your observations have been made over a statistically significant period of time.
3) What you are observing is driven by a single mechanism (effect) or particular combination of mechanisms.
Oftentimes, we can take an observation and turn it into a hypothesis that we then evaluate with
confirmation bias (we give more weight to evidence that supports our hypothesis and devalue evidence that would tend to disprove it). Even scientists need to be on guard against allowing confirmation bias to creep into their research.
This sort of confirmation bias has led people into thinking that their particular town or area was immune to tornadoes (for instance:
"Sometimes even local legends can contribute to a perception of invincibility:
EXAMPLE: Tornado, Waco, Texas, May 15, 1953. An Indian legend held that the area was immune to tornadoes. This was even printed in a pamphlet by the Chamber of Commerce (Moore, 1958:3)."
--from
Disaster Response, Chapter 2 (The Apathy Problem).
So the question might better be: Is there an effect or is it possible that I'm not using enough observations (data points) to show that there isn't any statistical effect?
Darren Addy
Kearney, NE