this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2025
227 points (98.3% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

35568 readers
5133 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] whosepoopisonmybuttocks@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

My limited knowledge on this subject: The z-score is how many standard deviations you are from the mean.

In statistical analysis, things are often evaluated against a p (probability) of 0.05 (or 5%), which also corresponds to a z-score of 1.96 (or roughly 2).

So, when you're looking at your data, things with a z score >2 or <2 would correspond to findings that are "statistically significant," in that you're at least 95% sure that your findings aren't due to random chance.

As others here have pointed out, z-scores closer to 0 would correspond to findings where they couldn't be confident that whatever was being tested was any different than the control, akin to a boring paper which wouldn't be published. "We tried some stuff but idk, didn't seem to make a difference." But it could also make for an interesting paper, "We tried putting healing crystals above cancer patients but it didn't seem to make any difference."

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 4 points 20 hours ago

i'm in a couple "we tried some stuff but it really didn't work" medical "research" papers, which we published so no one would try the same thing again.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

But it could also make for an interesting paper, "We tried putting healing crystals above cancer patients but it didn't seem to make any difference."

But then you have competing bad outcomes:

  1. The cancer patients aren't given any other treatment, so you're effectively harming them through lack of action/treatment
  2. The cancer patients are given other (likely real) treatments, meaning your paper is absolutely meaningless
[–] tias@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 12 hours ago

Some people will refuse other treatments regardless, so you're not changing the outcome.

[–] whosepoopisonmybuttocks@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There's certainly a lot to discuss, relative to experimental design and ethics. Peer review and good design hopefully minimize the clearly undesirable scenarios you describe as well as other subtle sources of error.

I was really just trying to explain what we're looking at on op's graph.