▲ 805 ▼ average physics student vs POTUS 47 (thelemmy.club) submitted 4 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz 122 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 13 points 4 months ago* (9 children) I think you mean then median person. ☝️🤓 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] TheRedSpade@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago (4 children) Can't speak for anyone else, but I was taught that mean, median, and mode are three different types of average. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 13 points 4 months ago (3 children) Oh crap. Translating average to my language yields the same word as mean. But you're right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) Because mean means average. I wouldn’t consider the median or the mode to be an average. Not sure what that commenter means by different “types of average”. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 4 months ago What they mean is that all three are different kinds of averaging. This is correct, but I don't think people in general think 'median' when they hear 'average' permalink fedilink source parent [–] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 1 point 4 months ago Not a native English speaker here. Today I learned, too. Thank you. permalink fedilink source parent [–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 months ago (3 children) Under a normal distribution/bell curve mean and median are the same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz -1 points 4 months ago (2 children) Considering intelligence/stupidity isn't defined, it's a lot to assume that its distribution can be approximated by a Gaussian. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) I don’t totally disagree, I’ve never seen an actual distribution of random iq scores permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 1 point 4 months ago And there's plenty of criticism of IQ tests as a proxy for intelligence, even if we did have the data. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TheRedSpade@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago (4 children) Can't speak for anyone else, but I was taught that mean, median, and mode are three different types of average. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 13 points 4 months ago (3 children) Oh crap. Translating average to my language yields the same word as mean. But you're right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) Because mean means average. I wouldn’t consider the median or the mode to be an average. Not sure what that commenter means by different “types of average”. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 4 months ago What they mean is that all three are different kinds of averaging. This is correct, but I don't think people in general think 'median' when they hear 'average' permalink fedilink source parent [–] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 1 point 4 months ago Not a native English speaker here. Today I learned, too. Thank you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 13 points 4 months ago (3 children) Oh crap. Translating average to my language yields the same word as mean. But you're right. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) Because mean means average. I wouldn’t consider the median or the mode to be an average. Not sure what that commenter means by different “types of average”. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 4 months ago What they mean is that all three are different kinds of averaging. This is correct, but I don't think people in general think 'median' when they hear 'average' permalink fedilink source parent [–] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 1 point 4 months ago Not a native English speaker here. Today I learned, too. Thank you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 months ago (1 child) Because mean means average. I wouldn’t consider the median or the mode to be an average. Not sure what that commenter means by different “types of average”. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 4 months ago What they mean is that all three are different kinds of averaging. This is correct, but I don't think people in general think 'median' when they hear 'average' permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 4 months ago What they mean is that all three are different kinds of averaging. This is correct, but I don't think people in general think 'median' when they hear 'average' permalink fedilink source parent
[–] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 1 point 4 months ago Not a native English speaker here. Today I learned, too. Thank you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 months ago (3 children) Under a normal distribution/bell curve mean and median are the same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz -1 points 4 months ago (2 children) Considering intelligence/stupidity isn't defined, it's a lot to assume that its distribution can be approximated by a Gaussian. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) I don’t totally disagree, I’ve never seen an actual distribution of random iq scores permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 1 point 4 months ago And there's plenty of criticism of IQ tests as a proxy for intelligence, even if we did have the data. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz -1 points 4 months ago (2 children) Considering intelligence/stupidity isn't defined, it's a lot to assume that its distribution can be approximated by a Gaussian. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) I don’t totally disagree, I’ve never seen an actual distribution of random iq scores permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 1 point 4 months ago And there's plenty of criticism of IQ tests as a proxy for intelligence, even if we did have the data. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago (1 child) I don’t totally disagree, I’ve never seen an actual distribution of random iq scores permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 1 point 4 months ago And there's plenty of criticism of IQ tests as a proxy for intelligence, even if we did have the data. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 1 point 4 months ago And there's plenty of criticism of IQ tests as a proxy for intelligence, even if we did have the data. permalink fedilink source parent