"Gayjar Jamming": the gut suspects measurement error

diff --git a/content/2022/gaydar-jamming.md b/content/2022/gaydar-jamming.md
index 16b28d8..c2730a1 100644 (file)
--- a/content/2022/gaydar-jamming.md
+++ b/content/2022/gaydar-jamming.md
@@ -29,4 +29,4 @@ I don't think Prof. H.'s voice was quite that extreme? Maybe it was only 2 or 2.
 
 And the effect size of childhood sex-typed behavior on sexual orientation [is around _d_ ≈ 1.3](/papers/bailey-zucker-childhood_sex-typed_behavior_and_sexual_orientation.pdf), so I'll actually go with roughly similar numbers for L.
 
-I could easily be wrong about the specific numbers, but I'm confident that this is the correct _methodology_. (Assuming that predictions don't causally [or otherwise](https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.05060) affect the things being predicted—but how likely is _that?_) My old anxieties about committing heresy have dissolved in the knowledge that it is, really, just a math problem.
+I could easily be wrong about the specific numbers. (My gut expects a _skilled_ "gaydar operator" to be more reliable than _d_ ≈ 1.1, which could still be true if the published statistics are [deflated by the measurement error](/2019/Sep/does-general-intelligence-deflate-standardized-effect-sizes-of-cognitive-sex-differences/) of less perceptive raters?) But I'm confident that this is the correct _methodology_. (Assuming that predictions don't causally [or otherwise](https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.05060) affect the things being predicted—but how likely is _that?_) My old anxieties about committing heresy have dissolved in the knowledge that it is, really, just a math problem.