Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 23 Feb 2013 09:18:04 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
My main concern about these studies is they necessarily examine average
or typical performance in controlled situations.
I always wonder how the anomalies are treated. It seems to me that
outliers and exceptions are often discarded in studies as they
complicate things for the researchers and muddy the water. Some
researchers are more honest than others and provide their complete data
so that others can cut and slice it differently. Others just seem to
say, "you don't need to see the data. Trust us, and trust that we did
not cherry-pick the data, and that we know how to use our stats
program. You only need the results".
Although the average performance is important to beekeepers, the
anomalies are of equal interest, as anomalies provide a great deal of
extra work and worry in a commercial operation -- and can affect profits
very adversely, even if the average performance is fine.
These studies typically are run for short periods in controlled
conditions since a real world test quickly becomes too complex, with
hives dying, hives requeening, winter loss, swarming, splitting, lost
data due to yard access problems, student screw-ups, etc.
Beekeepers live in the real world and although we appreciate the
insights and opinions of researchers, we are very aware that -- although
the studies may be replicated by other similar studies -- they are often
not replicated in real world experience.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
|
|