|
|
|
|
|
|
by sjmcmahon
650 days ago
|
|
|
This is generally good advice, but isn't it inappropriate in this specific instance? The lady's claim was (allegedly) that she has a perfect ability to distinguish between the tea-milk orders, so in that case even a single failure is indeed enough to reject her claim. We can't rule out her success rate being significantly greater than 50-50, but even a single failure puts some bounds on her maximum success rate. |
|
|
I believe you added the word "perfect" which makes a substantive difference. I think this highlights the complications that get involved when trying to turn a simple proposition into an meaningful claim:
- Can we prove that person X can observe taste of tea with > 50% reliability with 95% confidence (what Fischer did)
- Can we prove that person X can observe taste of tea with 100% reliability with 95% confidence (not statistically possible)
- Can we prove that person X cannot observe taste of tea with > 50% reliability with 95% confidence (only possible if this person guesses wrong more often than randomly)
- Can we prove that person X cannot observe taste of tea with 100% reliability with 95% confidence (just need one example)