Talk:Survivorship bias

message: I have added 4 new categories of examples to this article, but I have not added any supporting sources.  I would appreciate help in that regard.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZippyDan (talk • contribs) 16:16, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arts, Manufacturing, Architecture, Careers =

message: I don't understand this example. It seems to suggest that because the experiment focused on "strong telepaths", it achieved better results. If telepathy does not exist, selecting subjects for their telepathic abilities shouldn't influence the outcome? Joepnl (talk) 22:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joseph Banks Rhine  

message: I would speculate, based on what i know of biotechnology, that the claimed role of patents as an aid to innovation, is an example of survivorship bias.
We hear, loudly, companies tht make a lot of money from patents, but we don't hear from the failed or never started projects. One can see this clearly in academic research; methods that are not protected (two hybrid, GFP) become popular, because, unprotected by patents, innovation can flourish.
however, i don't have any data suitable for wiki pedia, these are just my thoughts.
I agree that the Rhine section could be re worked to make clearer.Cinnamon colbert (talk) 15:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: innovation and patents

message: The first sentence of the cats section is contradicted by the second sentence. The entire first paragraph makes no sense at all. --68.147.12.89 (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this comment was just misreading the text. I went back to the version just before this comment was made and it was fine. My guess is the phrase "leading to less severe injuries in cats who have fallen from six or more stories" was being read as "leading to less severe injuries than cats who have fallen from six or more stories". 199.127.114.114 (talk) 11:14, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cats 

message: It is "well known" that porpoises (bottle-nose dolphins) rescue drowning swimmers by helpfully pushing them towards the shore. The fate of swimmers pushed (unhelpfully) the other direction is unrecorded. 
Some enterprising Wikipedian might attempt to dredge up actual reports or studies of rescues and non-rescues. I lack the time and the inclination. Snezzy (talk) 10:11, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Porpoises 

message: Would it be worth mentioning that the theory of evolution is a form of survivorship bias? Basically, because some features are favored by evolution those are actually the features that survived on a grand scope. 12.246.109.18 (talk) 01:10, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evolution 

message: The philosopher who was questioned regarding paintings of those who had escaped shipwreck was Diagoras of Melos, not Diogenes. This can be verified by reading the text,
De Natura Deorum, III. xxxvi.— xxxvii.  24.50.227.197 (talk) 02:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: The main thrust of this section, that researchers before Wald had made recommendations without taking survivorship bias into account, is not supported by any of the sources. This may or may not be true. The study citedWald, Abraham. (1943). A Method of Estimating Plane Vulnerability Based on Damage of Survivors. Statistical Research Group, Columbia University.  CRC 432 — reprint from July 1980. Center for Naval Analyses. (a primary source) was an attempt to draw conclusions knowing that access to downed aircraft was limited or nonexistent. The other citation Reprint on author's web site does not suggest that this was a unique insight, but rather that Wald's use of statistical techniques to mitigate the problem was groundbreaking.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.86.10.125 (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  In the military 

message: I haven't been able to find any sources for this; it gets mentioned often in the context of survivorship bias, but is conspicuously absent from any articles discussing the Brodie helmet, including the Wikipedia article, and never has even a name attached to it, unlike the aircraft example. Hexadecima (talk) 00:47, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brodie helmets 

message: Stories of  great achievements by disabled people or who suffered difficult diseases, is sometimes cited as inspirational role models, in media and classroom. This includes Stephen Hawking, Anatoli Bugorski, Mark Inglis, and many other people. Similar happens with savant stereotype of autism. Sometimes it has a connotation that if a person with a disability or a difficult disease can achieve it, why an ordinary people won't be able to achieve it. But what is missed, is how many other people with similar disability or diseases remain unemployedhttps://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/resources/factsheet-on-persons-with-disabilities/disability-and-employment.html or unsuccessful or socially challanged in compared to the general population. 
2409:4061:70B:F80:C4AC:3DA3:CDEF:B9F5 (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  In disability and difficult diseases 

message: I may be missing something obvious here. Can anyone explain how this is relevant to the article? The choice of quotes is obviously biased towards those from successful entrepreneurs. Is the suggestion that there should be an equal number of quotes from the unsuccessful ones? --Graham Phillips 110 (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly related to the nearby text: "advice about commercial success distorts perceptions of it by ignoring all of the businesses and college dropouts that failed". The leap of logic perhaps being that many people who have failed were following the "advice" of the quotes too. However, this isn't said, or sourced to be said in the article, so the image seems pointless, and at best, confusing. I think it should be removed. (Hohum @) 00:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Framed quotes of successful CEOs in a public library 

message: esp the intro, full of jargon and complex writing and no simple examples
everything wrong with wikipedia, IMO  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.245.17.105 (talk) 15:37, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: And again the typical bias against the paranormal.  Possibly Rhine was biased, but anyway modern psi research takes account of such objection.  I'd add this point to the article, but that would be pointless as the team would instantly revert the page. Brian Josephson (talk) 16:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: terrible crappy article