So Wilt Chamberlain did lie about all those women.

[JSngry]

Ok, here we go. From http://pda.physorg.com/lofi-news-partners-...rown_10824.html

Brown, a professor of psychology at the University of Alberta, and colleagues Robert Sinclair of Laurentian University and Sean Moore of the Augustana College, have conducted several studies of this issue. The largest and most recent is a Web-based survey conducted in fall 2005. The researchers polled a Knowledge Networks panel of 2,065 heterosexual, U.S. non-virgins with a median age in their late 40s. The average number of sexual partners the women reported was 8.6. The average number the men reported was 31.9.

Now, who or what is Knowledge Networks?

From http://www.knowledgenetworks.com/info/main/who.html

Who We Are

Mission

Knowledge Networks is the consumer information company for the 21st century, combining advanced technologies and the highest-quality methods to deliver insights that boost marketing ROI and master your toughest business challenges.

How We Do It

From product development to media planning to public opinion research — we have the expertise to help you

• quickly identify your key marketing issues,
  
• design research that addresses these concerns head-on, and
  
• turn the results into simple, specific recommendations that you can put into action immediately.
  

For consumer information, our analysts can turn to an unprecedented array of exclusive KN resources, including:

• the only online panel based on an RDD sample of the full U.S. population;
  
• the largest database of loyalty card shopping behavior available for commercial research; and
  
• one of the highest quality telephone research facilities in the U.S.
  
  With these and other potential sources of learning, we are bridging the digital divide — developing the strategic insights you need to increase marketing effectiveness.
  

Origins

Knowledge Networks was founded in 1998 by two prominent Stanford University professors seeking to develop research methodologies for the next century. Their company quickly grew into a leading consumer insight provider, with numerous Fortune 500 clients. Posting average annual growth of about 75% over the past two years, Knowledge Networks is now among the top 25 U.S. research firms in terms of revenue.

In 2000, KN acquired Promotion Decisions, Inc., one of the most respected and innovative providers of promotion research. The next year, Statistical Research - the leader in high-quality media research - became a KN company. These two research practices contribute strongly to KN's capabilities while retaining the qualities that made them eminently successful in their own right.

See our corporate identity brochure.

Interesting...

[Chas]

Jim's skepticism was completely warranted .

The researchers polled a Knowledge Networks panel of 2,065 heterosexual, U.S. non-virgins with a median age in their late 40s.

Since according to the 2000 Census the median age in the U. S. is 35.3 , the sampling error is huge and of a type that could explain the under-reporting of females if we assume that the more promiscuous females tend to be younger females .

Of course who needs to worry about representative samples when you are in the businsess of , " designing research that addresses key marketing issues " .

The really sad part is that putatively scientifically-minded academics used the services of these corporate myrmidons instead of doing their own research .

[JSngry]

Thank you, Chas.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

[Epithet]

Nowhere did the researchers use percentages like that to draw their conclusion, and even if they did, it'd be a question of using the right statistic, not of considering extra possibilities.

Well DUH! Don't you think that being aware of all the possibilities would affect what kind of statistics were gathered in the first place? Did they think to include prostitites or other likely "high activity/random partners" women in their sampling? [...]

I still don't think you understood what you quoted of me, why drawing whatever-conclusion-it-was from whatever-percentage-fact-it-was doesn't work, and how it wasn't claimed by the researchers.

Thank you, Chas.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Good news to give the missus.

The researchers polled a Knowledge Networks panel of 2,065 heterosexual, U.S. non-virgins with a median age in their late 40s.

Since according to the 2000 Census the median age in the U. S. is 35.3 , the sampling error is huge and of a type that could explain the under-reporting of females if we assume that the more promiscuous females tend to be younger females .

Only on the assumption that the younger females are being more promiscuous with older males, i.e. if the more promiscuous males are younger, it's to a lesser degree than for the females. Right?

[JSngry]

I still don't think you understood what you quoted of me, why drawing whatever-conclusion-it-was from whatever-percentage-fact-it-was doesn't work, and how it wasn't claimed by the researchers.

Well of course I didn't. I don't understand too much of anything.

Please accept my most gracious and specific supplications in your general directions.

[Big Wheel]

Jim's skepticism was completely warranted .

The researchers polled a Knowledge Networks panel of 2,065 heterosexual, U.S. non-virgins with a median age in their late 40s.

Since according to the 2000 Census the median age in the U. S. is 35.3 , the sampling error is huge and of a type that could explain the under-reporting of females if we assume that the more promiscuous females tend to be younger females .

Not necessarily. Doesn't this just mean that nobody was surveying 8-year-olds?

[Epithet]

Jim's skepticism was completely warranted .

The researchers polled a Knowledge Networks panel of 2,065 heterosexual, U.S. non-virgins with a median age in their late 40s.

Since according to the 2000 Census the median age in the U. S. is 35.3 , the sampling error is huge and of a type that could explain the under-reporting of females if we assume that the more promiscuous females tend to be younger females .

Not necessarily. Doesn't this just mean that nobody was surveying 8-year-olds?

As I see it, if the median age was high and if younger women are more promiscuous with older men, you're going to be counting men's relationships that aren't reciprocated by the women you sampled. On the other hand, if younger women were more promiscuous with older men twenty years ago as well, you're going to be counting relationships they had with men who are older than the median and they aren't being sampled much either. But what if people are more promiscuous now? Will it still cancel out?

[JSngry]

Oh, so now it becomes potentially relevant whether or not the men and women sampled were of the type who would be likely partners of each other.

More good news to give the missus!

Thank you, Epithet.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Edited February 20, 2006 by JSngry

[Chas]

Jim's skepticism was completely warranted .

The researchers polled a Knowledge Networks panel of 2,065 heterosexual, U.S. non-virgins with a median age in their late 40s.

Since according to the 2000 Census the median age in the U. S. is 35.3 , the sampling error is huge and of a type that could explain the under-reporting of females if we assume that the more promiscuous females tend to be younger females .

Not necessarily. Doesn't this just mean that nobody was surveying 8-year-olds?

No . The sampling error here is real . The median age of the adult ( 18+ ) U.S. population is 43.3 according to the 2000 Census . The median of the survey sample used is higher . In fact , the median age of non-virgins would be somewhere between 35.3 and 43.3 since we would want to include all teenage non-virgins . Leaving out the population under thirteen does nothing to make the study sample less skewed .

If there is anymore to say on this topic it won't be from me....