(causal relationships are very important in the scientific community)
To draw causal conclusions
about the efficacy
of a psychological intervention
called poetry
researchers must compare the treatment
and condition of rhyme scheme and other
assortive literary devices (particular to irony
and being ironic or semantically distant - who cares
really)
with a control group that accounts for improvements
in the use of language
caused by factors other than the treatment
prescribed by the post modern interpretation
or section 7 of the constitution
(whichever comes to mind)
in order to sing
an active control helps to control
for the possibility that improvement
by the absurdists and the opinionists of the experimental group
resulted in fact from a placebo
effect.
or placebo poetry
Although active control groups
are superior to “no-contact” controls
(which is the beauty of writing poetry -
the no contact rule - no bodychecking or tackling is allowed)
only when the active control group has
the same expectation of improvement as the experimental group can we attribute differential improvements to the
potency of our ideas
and improve the quality of our writing
despite the need to match
expectations between treatment (comments and opinions)
and control groups, almost no
psychological interventions do so
as if to say
absurdists have intervened on behalf
of the failings of good advice ...
This failure to control for expectations is not a minor omission—it is a fundamental
design flaw that potentially undermines any causal inference. We illustrate these principles with a detailed example
design flaw that potentially undermines any causal inference. We illustrate these principles with a detailed example
