experimental-economicsI asked this question in the skeptics stackexchange, but it wasn’t relevant to them. The question has to do with how experiments are measured/designed to come to conclusions about correlation between two variables. Hopefully, it is relevant to economics. Otherwise, kindly guide me to the appropriate forum.
With reference to this article: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-new-brain/201204/religion-and-reason
My question is, when the experimental group turned out to be composed of more disbelievers than the control group (that’s what I suppose the statement “more likely to be disbelievers” means), the scientists are attributing it to the analytic test.
So they are effectively saying that their analytic test caused more than average disbelievers i.e. it managed to “convert” some people from a supposedly random and homogeneous enough group into disbelievers, right? That’s what they are saying - some people who before the analytic test thought they were believers after the test changed their stance.
Am I wrong in this understanding? Thanks in advance.
There were no answers to this question.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.