Showing 369 to 372

Toy Examples

Adapted from McElreath Chapter 10

# Prosocial chimpanzees: experiments to see whether chimps would
# pull a lever that deliver food to a fellow chimp, without cost to themselves.
# L pulled_left: 1 if the left lever was pulled
# P prosoc_left: 1 if the left lever was the prosocial option
#   chose_prosoc: 1 if pulled_left == prosoc_left
# C condition: another chimp was at the other end of the table
#   actor: which one out of 7 chimps
data(chimpanzees)
glimpse(chimpanzees)
help(chimpanzees)

ucb <- UCBadmit %>%
    mutate(male = ifelse(applicant.gender == "male", 1, 0)) %>%
    mutate(case = factor(1:12))
Created (3 years ago)

Sampling

#statistics

The chain of subsets goes like this:

Sampling unit < Sample < Sampling frame < Population

Terms:

The target population
all subjects of interest (to which you want to be able to apply a conclusion) e.g. "all cows in the world".
The sampling frame
the subset of the population, from which you draw your sample, e.g. "all cows in Skane county".
Sampling design or sampling procedure
the whole plan, basically, may involve such concepts as stratified sampling

Population definition

Be specific!

  • All current customers -> Everyone who's bought from us in the last year.
  • SDSU students loyal to the football team -> SDSU students registered in Fall 2019 and have attended at least one game while a student
  • Unsatisfied customers -> Customers with an active paid account and have either scored us a 3 or lower in the last year or registered a complaint through e-mail

A good pop. def. uses clear, unambig, objective criteria to disting. betw. pop. and non-pop. members.

A good pop def suits the needs of the audience requesting the research

  • It is common that the client you're working with has a hazy idea of what makes someone a member of the pop of interest. Before you undertake your whole study, get verification from them so that all parties agree what the pop def is!

A good pop def matches with previous research so that the present study can be directly compared with them.

Sampling frame

Leslie Kish posited four basic problems of sampling frames:[7]

  1. "Errors of omission": Missing elements: Some members of the population are not included in the frame.
  2. "Errors of inclusion": Foreign elements: Non-members of the population are included in the frame.
  3. Duplicate entries: A member of the population is surveyed more than once.
  4. Groups or clusters: The frame lists clusters instead of individuals.

Example 1: errors of omission

Pop. of interest: all customers who have been on our tele-therapy platform in the last 30 days

Sampling frame: A list of 5,000 customer phone numbers, which were collected from customers after their 90-day free trial expired.

OK, there is going to be some, and probably sizable, overlap between these sets of individuals (many individuals are in both). However, some error sources:

  • Maybe the company didn't provide a complete customer list, just a list of 5,000. This kind of error of omission is okay – if the 5,000 were selected randomly, it won't affect conclusions.
  • People still in the trial period haven't had to submit phone numbers yet. This kind of error of omission poses a problem: the cause of the omission systematically differentiates your in-frame pop from your out-of-frame pop.

Potential remedies

  • If some pop characteristics are known, measure your sample and compare to see if they are approx equivalent, showing that the sample is representative.
    • E.g. if you KNEW from other research that the target pop is 65% 60+ years old, but your frame only has 5% 60+ years old, there's an issue!
Created (3 years ago)

2022-May-31

07:30

Review of iQunix F96

First off, I've been using a laptop keyboard for years, so naturally the Cherry Reds on this one feel amazing.

I was pleased that the keys don't wobble as much as some other Cherry MX-based keyboards I've touched. They still wobble a bit but I guess that's fundamental to the Cherry MX design.

An aside on the switch choice: At first I got one with MX Blue, which I was glad to swap out for Red. Why? Because

  1. Despite the Reds being "silent", and my taking care not to bottom out hard, typing with Reds still makes an adequate clang-clang sound – it's much louder than a laptop.
  2. Blues feel bad to my fingers. I've touched some tactile switches that feel amazing, like IBM's old buckling springs and the EC Ivy switches. Compared to those, I find it difficult to classify any Cherry MX designs as tactile, they feel like defective linears, as if they had sand in the spring. Brown is the worst, but Blue's not great.

Now for the more arbitrary design choices of the F96.

Pros

  • I can hit left Ctrl with the palm.

Aesthetic pros

  • Function keys are vertically aligned with number row
  • Colors

Aesthetic cons

  • The backlight shines through some keycaps but not others, depending on their color. On the Coral Red variant, the reddish keys are more transparent.

Cons

MEH The spacebar

My standard complaint: the spacebar is wide (6 units).

  • It's not much wider than a laptop's spacebar (typically 5 units), but sufficient that I'll now rarely hit the Win key with my thumb. I prefer if the Win key is right under the Z key, not so far off to the side.
  • To clarify, I'd prefer the spacebar a maximum of 2-3 units wide, like a Japanese keyboard. I've learned to tolerate 5 units, but to make it even wider is gratuitous.
FAIL The arrow keys

I chose the F96 because it's a compact design. It's not that I want a physically small keyboard, but the fact compact designs push keys closer together, so they're easier to reach. That's most obvious around the arrow-key cluster. But it turns out you can do this wrong, and end up worse than standard.

How to do it right: Some laptops like the Dell Latitude E7250 let me use the arrow keys with the pinky, ring and middle fingers, and at the same time use my free index finger to hold either Alt or Ctrl, both of which are close enough to the arrow keys for this. I do this thousands of times a day (Alt + Left Arrow is "back" in on most web browsers, for example).

I must give the F96 a failing grade. The Right Alt key sits exactly 3 keys away from the arrow keys! This straddles the worst-of-all-worlds territory where it's uncomfortable no matter if I use my index finger (when it's too far away) or if I use my thumb (when it's too close).

"But you could remap the keys via software!" – Actually no you can't because of the Fn key. Since Fn doesn't exist to the operating system, you can never move the Fn key unless the keyboard's own firmware provides a way, which is rare. I'd suggest to keyboard makers to place Fn somewhere less problematic, like near F12, if not meeting the gold standard of just shipping QMK firmware.

Adding insult to injury, look where the PageUp and PageDown keys are located. This makes it impossible to type Alt+PageUp or Alt+PageDown with the right hand.

Created (3 years ago)

Rhetorical analysis

Rhetoric of the underprivileged

First, let's see what's typical of classical rhetoric:

  1. Public: there is a space (agora) for adopting a stance together on general questions. Directed towards the citizens with the power to act.
  2. Doxical: Can support arguments on listeners' doxa
  3. Agonistic: confrontative. Not that much in genus demonstrativum, but even there, the praised's virtues are contrasted with others' flaws, the specter of the cultural outsider seen as bad.
  4. Authoritative: the speaker typically appears as a role model showing the way forward
  5. Closed: there is a preset thesis
  6. Monological: speaks to listeners, not with conversants. When not monologuing, the ancients were into dialectics, a style of debate that pits two viewpoints against each other to see which one "wins", and the purpose then is to find truth, not to convince.
  7. Persuasive

The anti-rhetorical style Karlyn Kohr Campbell observed inside women's groups (Rhetoric of Women: an Oxymoron):

  1. Private
  2. Not doxical: can't support arguments with shared doxa because no such thing
  3. No antagonism: to speak in the group is to realize a sisterhood. Any antagonism is directed outwards.
  4. Non-authoritative: the only authority is held by someone speaking of their own experiences in their own domain, but none in the group has the power to say what's the best way forward, nor are they trying to win it
  5. Open: participants have no aim except to question what they already think of their situation, by joining a group where all speak with equal agency. Joining the group is to ``risk your very self'' in a rhetoric that doesn't wrap a fixed program.
  6. Non-monological: nobody is standing on a podium
  7. No persuasion: The goal is a process, not a final belief. You serve up your insights and questions, and leave it to others to see any lessons in your words.
  • First observed in women's rhetoric.
  • A classic trope used by women persuading men: the antistrephon, generally useful when you're in a lower position
  • Classical rhetoric is useful for a society with many internally conflicting interests, then there is a need for one unifying force that decides what's what
  • Women's rhetoric is forced to revolt against the ruling patriarchal system. "The choice to be moderate and reformist doesn't exist for those who propose the liberation of woman". Here it must develop an antagonistic and confrontative strategy. But it cannot support itself on a counter-doxa, because whatever such a counter-doxa may say, it has been corrupted by the current system that outwardly supports the same values as the women's movement (democracy, equality, personal independence) but in practice betrays them.
    • Therefore, women's rhetoric must work with a more intentional method that reveals the contradiction in male-dominated society between its principally democratic ideas and its unfair treatment of people who happen to be women.
    • It may be done through incongruous perspectives ("Is God a black woman?") or symbolic reversals (filling a term like "whore" with positive meaning). As Campbell says, the purpose is to "do violence against the structure of reality". It's a demonstrative genre that dissolves doxa instead of confirming it.
    • How would a social structure look, where the women's group discussion rhetoric could be a pattern for the public discourse? We can suppose that on each point it must differ from the patriarchal system, leaving it entirely in splinters. It would mean a social order where the struggle between groups has been replaced by a peaceful cooperation (presupposing that systemic injustice and all other objective reasons for conflict have disappeared), where a general equality and respect for others has spread and where traditional positions of authority has been destroyed, where the preference for dogmatic and ideological thinking has been destroyed and a free search for truth and value is encouraged and respected in everyone, where opinions don't spread from centers of power via megaphones but are always forming and being aired in small and large groups that stand in a dialogical cooperation and where, finally, the desire to convince others about one's own opinon has been replaced with a curiosity for other perspectives, to try other positions and to recgnize their situational-bound value.
      • Which tendencies in current society have an effect towards that social structure and which have an effect in the opposite? This becomes important to recognize for whoever would like to see this form of rhetoric in political discourse.

Bitzers punkter

  1. Exigence, En tvingande omständighet som inbjuder till retorisk handling
  2. Audience. En publik som äger förmågan att förmedla den retoriska handlingen och därmed upphäva den kritiska omständigheten
  3. Constraints. Alla de restriktioner eller tvingande begränsningar som talaren har att ta hänsyn till om hon eller han vill kunna övertyga publiken att betrakta eller gripa sig an omständigheten på det sätt som talaren önskar.

Retorisk publik

Den man egentligen riktar sig mot, som uppfyller Bitzers punkt om audience.

Ullen: Åkessons retoriska publik var alla framtida väljare .

Vatz

  • No situation is objective. Situations exist on the basis of a description of them that builds on our subjective experience of them.
  • The way we choose to characterize a situation always affects how we experience it. So rhetoric helps determine what the situation even is.
  • Situational rhetoric is a myth
  • ☑ Creating salience

Ullen

  • ☑ Says that Bitzer and Vatz are best seen as completing each other.
  • Bitzer has the approach of the analyzing rhetorician
  • Vatz has the approach of the speaker
  • ☑ Bitzer views the rhetoric as an answer on the situation in a similar way that an answer answers a question.
  • Bitzer says that the rhetor chooses a response dependent on how they perceive the situation, althoug he also says the situation basically prescribes only one correct response, and it is on the speaker to decode the situation accurately.
  • ☑ Koppling mellan ideologi och dåd. När någon begår terrordåd inspirerad av ideolog, delar andra med samma ideologi ansvar för detta dåd?

Fanfiction

  • Trovärdigheten som författare bygger på en djup och bred kunskap om fandomen.

Style

The best style is the one that doesn't get noticed.

Tegners sentens: det dunkelt sagda är det dunkelt tänkta. Isokrates skriver: Förmågan att tala väl och att tänka väl går hand i hand, och det är stilen som förenar de två.

Eva Östlund-Stjärnegårdh har studerat sambandet mellan stil och betyg i gymnasisters nationella prov i svenska. Det visade sig att varierad meningslängd och varierade fundament var viktigast, alltså att ha både långa och korta meningar, och att ha få meningar som börjar med "Det är…".

Standarddef av ironi är att säga en sak men mena det motsatta. Men detta är inte en bra def. Det kan sägas bygga på ett psykolingvisktiskt missförstånd om hur språkförståelse går till. Föreställnigen: att vi först uppfattar en bokstavlig betydelse och därefter börajr vi söka efter en annan, avsedd betydelse.

The biggest reason this def is not good is it excludes many linguistic actions.

Created (3 years ago)
Showing 369 to 372