Selection bias example time
Do you answer these polls
Yes
No
Reblog for sample size
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Germany
seen from Bangladesh

seen from Netherlands

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Brazil
seen from Brazil

seen from Malaysia

seen from Bolivia

seen from United States
seen from Yemen
seen from Türkiye

seen from China
seen from Singapore
seen from Russia
seen from Malaysia
seen from Tunisia
seen from South Korea
Selection bias example time
Do you answer these polls
Yes
No
Reblog for sample size
Which thing is better?
Selection bias
Autocomplete
Are you on Tumblr right now?
Yes
No
That last post of yours about how to find lots of bones is really great ! Makes me wonder though, do you ever find recently deceased animals ? they are most of what i've personally found, and i currently have three decomposing in my garden. Just curious if you come across any yourself!
Oh, all the time!
Some people are skeptical that I would find so many clean bones. But selection bias affects everyone’s social media (and mainstream media), no matter how you try to keep things accurate.
I don’t post things that I don’t think are interesting, nor things I think would upset/scare people away (unless it’s REALLY interesting and has enough warnings) and I don’t want to get banned from social media either. I don’t want to give the impression that bone hunting is so simple you can find 15 clean skulls in 51 seconds (usually) but I cull out the naughty stuff, keeping the clean pretty stuff.
So yes, I find lots of gross smelly fleshy carcasses! Spilled organs and blood and certain body parts we don’t like to see! But I cannot post them.
"I don't know anyone who died from the spanish flu"
My roommate: it pisses me off how many people I see out and about when I go to the grocery store!
Also my roommate: OK we have the grocery list settled at 8:30 in the morning. I’m going to wait to head out until sometime around noon.
Say cheese! August 19th is World Photography Day! On this day in 1839, the French government purchased the patent rights to the daguerreotype process, the first publicly available photographic process, and then relinquished its claim and published complete working instructions, declaring the technology a “free gift to the world”. In exchange, Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre (1787-1851), the inventor of the daguerreotype, was provided with a lifetime pension. A lifetime pension was also extended to Isidore Niépce (1805–1868), the son of Nicéphore Niépce (1765-1833), an inventor who, in 1822, had produced the world's first heliograph, a photographic process used to create the world’s oldest known surviving photograph from nature.
While the 19th century would see a proliferation of new photographic technologies, the development of a reliable means of capturing stable colors would have to wait until the early 20th century, despite the best efforts of many. Until the introduction of the autochrome process, patented in 1903 by the Lumière brothers in France, the vast majority of photographers that wanted to see color in their photographs had to add it themselves by hand. You can see a selection of images produced using the autochrome process in the Hagley Digital Archive by clicking here. While autochrome photography constituted a massive step forward in photographic history, its colors were not exact, and its limitations were often most apparent when photographing people. While new methods of reproducing color in photographs were introduced over the next few decades, this remained a persistent problem.The circa 1950s photograph shown here was taken at the DuPont's Photo Products laboratory in Parlin, New Jersey, where company scientists were working on experimental films that could more accurately capture skin tones. DuPont was not alone in this effort; it had many competitors, most notably the Kodak Company. Beginning in the 1950s, Kodak began issuing photographs of employee and studio model Shirley Page to photo labs processing Kodak film as a reference image for correctly developing skin tones on film. As the decades passed, the original Shirley retired, but the Shirley card, featuring new models, continued. One thing that did not change was the race of the model; as in the image above, Kodak’s Shirleys were all white women. By the 1970s, however, Kodak had begun to face criticism over the lack of racial diversity in its Shirley cards, which did result in poorer quality photographs of non-white subjects. In 1977, filmmaker Jean-Luc Godard famously refused to use Kodak film stock while filming in Mozambique, declaring the product to be both inadequate for the job and a product of racism. By the 1980′s, Kodak and other photographic products manufacturers that had also adopted the Shirley card method had responded to pressure and were issuing cards showing multi-racial group photographs. This photograph is from the Hagley Library’s DuPont Company product information collection (Accession 1972.341). To view more digitized material from this collection, visit its page in our Digital Archive by clicking here.
Simulating Jury Selection Bias in Favor of a Majority Population from Peremptory Challenges