BibSonomy

OCLC

Gallup Forum on markkinatutkimusyritys Kantarin internet-paneeli, jonka yli 50 000 jäsenen vastaajakanta on valittu kuntakohtaisena satunnaisotantana edustamaan suomalaisia. Yritykset, järjestöt ja julkinen sektori ovat kiinnostuneita tuotteitaan ja palveluitaan käyttävien ihmisten mielikuvista ja asenteista. Mitä enemmän ne tietävät siitä, mitä nykyiset ja potentiaaliset asiakkaat, kansalaiset ja kuluttajat ajattelevat, sitä helpommin ne voivat parantaa tarjoamiaan tuotteita ja palveluita. Gallup Forumin jäsenten mielipiteet ovat kriittisiä monenlaisen kehityksen kannalta. Panelistien mielipiteiden avulla voidaan luoda uusia tuotteita, vaikuttaa kaupan tuotteisiin, tarjottuihin palveluihin, mainontaan ja tulevaisuuden suunnitteluun. Kantar – Suomen johtava markkinatutkimusyritys on auttanut yrityksiä selvittämään kuluttajien mielipiteitä jo vuodesta 1945, jolloin yritys perustettiin nimellä Suomen Gallup Oy. Tutkimuksia tehdään puhelimitse, kirjeitse ja internetissä käyttäen Gallup Forum -paneelia. Kantar toimii yli 80 maassa ja on maailman johtava dataa, näkemystä ja konsultointia tarjoava yritys. Jos halut lisätietoa Kantarista, Ota yhteyttä.

A guide to accessing the Stats NZ Open Data API. Contribute to StatisticsNZ/open-data-api development by creating an account on GitHub.

The Brains Blog | Patricia Cheng on October 28, 2021

While implementing a quick toy example of Crane and Sawhney's really great Monte Carlo Geometry Processing paper, the question arose about whether a quick function I grabbed from The Internet to equally distribute points on a sphere was correct or not. Since it's absolutely the crux of the method, this is an important question! This notebook performs a rather unscientific check for equal distribution of points on the surface of a sphere. It uses the first algorithm from MathWorld

Black Harvard economics professor wrote a research paper investigating whether racial differences in police shooting rates were the result of “racial bias” or “statistical discrimination”. Statistical discrimination = an individual or institution treats people differently based on data that reflects the average behavior of a racial group. Racial bias = if police pull over black drivers at a rate that disproportionately exceeded their likelihood of drug possession, that would be an irrational behavior representing individual or institutional bias. Jewish Harvard Health & Human Rights Fellow finds flaws in methodology, but also shows extreme lack of neutrality to social science research! These are two of his opening statements: 1. "There should be no argument that black and Latino people in Houston are much more likely to be shot by police compared to whites." 2. "the idea of “statistical discrimination” is just as abhorrent as “racial bias”." Methodological flaw one seems valid. 1. pulling people over who are most likely to have done something illegal, and making more arrests is rational behavior by police. It isn't the right approach to shootings though, as police officers are not trying to rationally maximize the number of shootings. 2. flaw two is described as this: actual study assumes a population of people who are shot by police OR people who are arrested. Proper approach is to assume a population of drivers stopped by police that can have one of two outcomes: they can be arrested, or not. This is a less valid criticism, because "proper approach" doesn't even have shooting as an outcome! Finding is that of the two groups (shot OR arrested), racial disparity in arrest rates is larger than the racial disparity in police shooting.

by Jeremy Anderson on May 16, 2021