[lbo-talk] green consumers: thieving pricks

[Miles Jackson]

Wojtek S wrote:
> Miles: Again, the experimental design does control for this possible effect.
>   The results provide clear evidence of causality.
>
> [WS:] It does not take much to convince you, apparently.  As for me, the
> experiment suggests a connection but not causality, because it does not rule
> out spuriousness.  To prove a connection, I would like to see more rigorous
> actual controls and fewer heroic assumptions about those controls.
>   
I'm making no heroic assumptions; I'm just passing along what every 
statistics student learns in their first course on probability.  If you 
randomly assign people to two groups, the potential confounds are also 
randomly distributed across the groups, and it is not plausible to argue 
that the groups systematically differ.  Really, it's Probability 101.  
Random assignment to experimental condition is a very powerful and 
rigorous technique to control confounds here (including any potential 
confounds you and I are not clever enough to imagine!).

Miles