

Study: Packages Sealed with ‘Atheist’ Tape 10 Times More Likely to Disappear - bado
http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/03/28/study-packages-sealed-with-atheist-tape-10-times-more-likely-to-disappear/

======
tokenadult
My all-time favorite link to share in Hacker News discussions about a
preliminary research finding is the article "Warning Signs in Experimental
Design and Interpretation" by Peter Norvig, LISP hacker and director of
research at Google, on how to interpret scientific research.

<http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html>

As other comments have already pointed out, it's not clear from such a small
sample size that the observed results can be generalized as a description of
reality. If people are worried about this issue (and it does seem like a
legitimate concern), try running lots of replication studies, with variations
in study methodology and variations in experimental conditions, and see what
happens. If I randomly receive a package, I'm suspicious in general, but maybe
other people are glad to get surprises in the mail.

~~~
revelation
_178_ packages to test a system that is designed to _give the same result
every single time_. How is that a "small sample size"?

I picked a random article from Nature Medicine. They used groups of _6_ mice,
you know, the living organisms, to test the result of some obscure DNA change
on bone formation, you know, the process with hundreds of intermediate stages
and a bazillion of environmental factors. These studies are rarely if ever
reproduced.

But it's here that all the theorethical scientists come out of the woodwork to
give some off-remark on how it has a "too small sample size" or didn't control
for X.

~~~
jasongill
Not to disagree with your sentiment entirely, but my wife, who's career was
spent as a laboratory animal vet, is frothing at the mouth over your comment.

Studies using mice are WAY more controlled than you would expect. The mice are
custom bred, genetically modified, and have specifically tuned immune systems.
They cost tens of thousands of dollars each (this is not a joke). Since mice
reproduce so quickly (and is so profitable), these things can be basically
custom ordered to exactly your specifications - with statistically
insignificant genetic differences between each one. They come with paperwork
showing their exact genetic details, they are RFID tagged in some cases, and
they are tested repeatedly before being used in studies - genetically and
otherwise.

Regarding environment, these animals are kept in extremely controlled
conditions. Forced airflow is repeatedly filtered and tested; the water comes
from highly filtered sources into each cage. Animal food and bedding is
irradiated to kill any microbes, and is generally highly regulated. Each
animal room contains multiple "sentinel" animals, which are exposed to the
same environment as the test subjects (and controls) but are tested to make
sure that environmental factors don't impact the study.

Additionally, each mouse cage (about the size of a shoebox) holds 5 adult
mice; racks of these cages connected to water/air contain ~144 cages. A study
with only 6 mice is highly unlikely (although not impossible). With such a
large number of animals per square foot, and such a high concentration of grad
students, studies are repeated ad nauseam - more so than is ever publicized
(mistakes do get made).

Again, not to say that your view of this little "experiment" with tape is
invalid, but animal studies (especially mice) are way more controlled than you
could ever imagine.

~~~
revelation
I didn't want to express that these studies don't take the utmost precautions
to guarantee a reproducible and significant result, using animals that are
essentially clones of each other and all the things you describe.

But at the end, results come down to whether a statistical test found that
their findings are statistically significant. They don't exactly try to
establish a causal nexus: they admit ignorance over the controlling factors.

ATHEIST did just that, run a bunch of statistical tests, and they all yielded
p-values lower than what passes for statistical significance in that Nature
article.

------
ghshephard
I'd like to see the actual survey data. I'm not even sure how to interpret
this:

"Thus the ad hoc study: The company says it sent two packages each to 89
people (178 packages total) canvassing nearly every U.S. state — one package
with the Atheist-branded tape, one without. And this is where the results
suggest something fishy: According to Atheist Shoes, company-branded packages
took on average three days longer to reach their destination and were 10 times
more likely to disappear outright."

What does "10 times more likely to disappear outright" mean? Are they saying
that 10 of the 89 Atheist packages disappeared, and only 1 of the 89 non-
atheist packages disappeared?

~~~
simonsez
Agreed - the sample size is also really small to be interpreting slower
arrival times as well, if only 1 or 2 packages took a long time it's likely
they just found an outlier.

~~~
A1kmm
According to <http://www.atheistberlin.com/study> they got a significant
Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test at p < 0.01. The Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test is
nonparametric (i.e. sacrifices some statistical power in order to not make
assumptions about the underlying distribution of the data) so is meaningful
even if there is a long tail of packages that take longer due to circumstances
outside of the study variable.

------
JohnBooty
I realize this is purely anecdotal, but my uncle worked for the USPS as a mail
carrier in a major East Coast city for decades and saw people fired for
_really_ small violations. In one case, a guy with many years of seniority was
fired because he stole some spam-mail coupons that a company had mailed to a
non-existent address.

I'm not saying the USPS is a model of efficiency and I'm sure there are
regional variations on strictness and oversight, but it's pretty likely that
any USPS who loses (or "loses") a greater-than-average number of packages is
risking their job.

I don't doubt that there are people who'd object to a package marked "ATHIEST"
but how many USPS employees would be so offended they'd risk their jobs?

USPS workers often work there for decades and a lot of USPS employees have an
eye towards staying there until retirement. They also get good health
benefits, a nice government pension, and you don't need a higher education
diploma to get hired by the USPS in the first place. A USPS employee is
unlikely to have a lot of comparable job opportunities after spending years
with the USPS, so I have a hard time believing so many of them would be like,
"ATHIEST? Screw _this!_ " and simply punt a package they disliked off of a
bridge.

------
xaritas
This could be sabotage, but maybe somebody is just doing it for kicks. Either
way, it's really too bad about all these lost soles.

~~~
nealabq
The heels responsible should foot the bill and be given the boot.

~~~
mixmax
Almost as witty as the article headline announcing British politician Michael
Foot being placed in charge of a committee on decommissioning nuclear weapons

"Foot heads arms body"

------
panhandlr
Study: Controversy is 10 times more likely to sell shoes

------
utopkara
I don't care if I get downvotes for saying this, but I think this story is
full of crap.

Such a small sample size could only be considered acceptable if there was
overwhelming consistence.

Also, the USPS system is not a black box, it is well known that they optimize
for cost, not speed. e.g., if the adresses happen to not have the 9-digit zip,
the packages will have to go through manual sorting, probably understaffed.

I'd say no real atheist would trumpet for this crap quasi-science, only those
who pretend to be one just for making a quick buck would.

------
olalonde
Previous discussion: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5442728>

------
robomartin
If one had several thousand dollars to waste it'd be interesting to run a
larger test with a range of deities as well as "atheist", "flying spaghetti
monster", the little fish symbol and other religious and non-religious words
and symbology. I'd throw in stuff like Mickey Mouse, Obama and George Bush
images in there to have some fun.

The results could be very interesting.

~~~
ryguytilidie
Not really though. Does finding that many religious people in the US are
insanely intolerant really prove anything?

~~~
saraid216
It proves that God is a third variable?

Hidden. Unknowable. The connecting thread between two completely unrelated
incidents.

------
RexRollman
Sad.

