Today I'm happy to announce the completion of a new publication, written in collaboration with @janie -- as a followup to the Energetics Survey data collection initiated here. This study is the first of its kind, designed to independently control for vultology and psychology, and to pivot the two against each other to see if indeed vultology and psychology correspond, or don't, under controlled circumstances. Since the energetic survey was used, this study looks only at the 4 energetics, not the individual types.
I will post the abstract here, and further notes in subsequent posts:
Abstract: Preliminary data obtained from 60 vultologically classified individuals, using the CTVC3, is compared against data from the Energetics Survey 1 (ES1), to test the degree of dependence between psychology and vultology. A chi-square examination was performed on the two groups to check for dependency, with no dependency as the null hypothesis. The results showed a critical chi-square value equivalent to p ≤0.005, leading to a rejection of the null hypothesis. The vultological classifications and psychological survey result data show a statistically significant dependency, evidencing that vultological type corresponds to psychological type designation via the ES1.
Permalink: Click Here
As you will see in the study, the correspondence between the two sources of data is well beyond chance, with a p value of p ≤0.005, compelling us to reject the null hypothesis. Thank you to everyone who participated in this survey! We now have a clear answer to this question. I believe this study is central to CT's claim, and it's one that can be used to communicate to others that the phenomenon being charted here is reproducible.
Please feel free to share this with others, next time you are in discussion and they bring up a lack of evidence. 😉
A few methodological notes:
In other words, the "p" value is well under 0.001.
Having said this, there's no such thing as a correct p value, which always requires some assumptions (which are almost never perfectly correct), so here are mine: Survey result, vultological type, and vultological development are all independent random variables. Assuming that survey result is independent of the other two is of course part of the null hypothesis. However, assuming the independence of vultological type and vultological development is a matter of convenience, and almost certainly false.