You know Yoda, that my detractors thought you meant mean-SPRITED...something that, believe it or not, I almost never am.
So everyone is on the same page. The word "Mean" was used in a post elsewhere which some may have taken to "mean" cruel, spiteful, or malicious. This was not the case nor was the word used in that context.
Onward.
Okay, for the curioius out there, let's really get it right. Responding to oneof Brian's posts on "another" site, I wrote a simple -- or at least Ithought it was simple -- one sentence response:
"It appears that Regression to the Mean is alive and well in your neckof the woods."
Anyway, some mistook the line and thought it was a personal shot. In no way wasthat the case (as you can plainly see by reading the post itself reprintedhere). It is informative and should definitely put to rest any idea that I wasdisparaging in any way.
brianmanzella wrote:
the Mean?
Good Question.
Regression to the Mean is a statistical term that describes thephenomenon wherein extreme observations tend to revert (regress) to a norm(mean) that is located midway between the observed extremes.
Example.
Upper Extreme. Two very tall people have a child. Will that childbe as tall or taller than the parents? No, the probability is that the childwill be shorter.
Lower Extreme. Two very short people have a child. Will thatchild be as short or shorter than the parents? No, the probability is thatthe child will be taller.
The Mean. Hence, we have a lot of average-sized peoplerunning around on Spaceship Earth.
My brief post noted that your empirical observations validated thatscientific phenomenon. Namely:
1. Golfers playing the very stiffest shafts (upper extreme) tend to needsomething weaker; whereas
2. Golfers playing the very weakest shafts (lower extreme) tend to needsomething stiffer.
Threaded Mode