• Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      “Driven” suggest more than half of total pregnancies, which is not true looking at the graph given above. It was solidly thirdfourth* in terms of totals, which is still unsettling, but not as pronounced as your comment suggests.

      *I overlooked 25-29

      • Wogi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Who told you that drivers have to be 51%?

        That’s not what a driver is. Driver is a general term, ten pregnancies are a driver of total birth rate, as they have impacted total fertility significantly.

        • Ech@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          Less than 20% of a total is “significant”?

          • ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yes. For example, 60 million people in the US (less than 20% of our total population) is a significant amount of people.

            • Ech@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              1 month ago

              The amount the percentage represents is irrelevant. A billion people could be involved, but if the total is 7 billion, it’s not going to be a significant part of the total trend.

              • Wogi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                1 month ago

                5% can be a driver if it’s having a decent impact on your results. This is kind of a stats 101 thing man. You might even look for those outliers in your results and find a way to specifically exclude them if you find that the information you’re getting is being skewed. Do that too hard and it’s called P-hacking.

                “We found that the bottom 5% of respondents were driving results negatively and so excluded the top and bottom 5%.”

                Think about it as a literal driver. It’s a driver. It’s not the driver and also half the passengers. You can drive a motorcycle, you can drive a bus, and how much of the occupancy you are of those two things can change dramatically but you’re still a driver.

                • Ech@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Obviously even 1 extreme outlier can skew things, but that’s not the case here.

                  In the terms of your analogy, this is about 3 people out of 20 pedaling a (weirdly long) bike and steered by all of them (somehow). Would you say that group of 3 are driving? Or would you concede it’s the two groups of 6 that are mostly driving the bike?

                  • Wogi@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    What happens when those three pedal the other direction?

                    It’s stats, it’s a descriptive term. It just literally doesn’t mean what you’re saying it means.

                    A driver in stats is just an item or a group that has a significant impact on the final result. What that means is going to vary from study to study.

                    Anyway, you can hold on to your belief about what a driver is, you are factually incorrect, and you were also kind of an asshole to the other guy. I’m out.

                  • ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    Your numbers are all over the place and don’t really make sense for what you’re talking about. 3 plus two groups of 6 would only be 15 out of 20, so where did the other 5 people go?

                    But more to the point, if those 3 stop pedaling, or pedal harder than everyone else combined, or apply the brakes, or tip the bike over, any number of other things they could absolutely change the speed/direction of the bike.

          • acockworkorange
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yeah. Less than 1% would be insignificant. More than 5% is significant, most times. More than 10% is definitely significant.