121 subjects gives an average of only 24 people with each of the five personality types, which makes this a small study.
Personality seems like quite a complex thing can it really be summarized with any accuracy in just 5 types.
Welcome to Phoenix Rising!
Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.
To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.
121 subjects gives an average of only 24 people with each of the five personality types, which makes this a small study.
Sorry, but this is not correct. There are no personality types, each individual is rated on 5 dimensions (scales) of personality. See:121 subjects gives an average of only 24 people with each of the five personality types
But my cat had to be put down today so I'm in a foul mood and might not be giving this research a fair crack.
Can you explain this more clearly?I suspect they haven't corrected for multiple comparisons (which increase the chance of false positives)
Thanks for the correction, that's the problem with stomping around in a bad mood . I've modified my post accordingly, but my conclusion that these findings are unlikely to replicate or be biologically relevant ramains.Sorry, but this is not correct. There are no personality types, each individual is rated on 5 dimensions (scales) of personality.
The usual p<0.05 statistical test in research means that there is a chance of no more than 5% of the result being a false positive. But that's on the basis of testing just one item, eg correlating neuroticism score with expression levels of pro-inflammatory genes.[correcting for mulitple comparisons]Can you explain this more clearly?
It's a fascinating book, actually. It makes that case that in the US, particularly, extraversion is socially favoured, to the detriment of society as a whole - with educational practices geared to the liking of extraverts (group work) that are poor in terms of learning for both extraverts and introverts. Lots of interesting stuff in there.
I agree with your criticisms. However, I do not find it unlikely that there could be associations between personality and immunity. Genes code for immunity, and genes code for personality. So it seems logical that there must exist certain genotypes, both with regard to immunity and personality. In other words, genes that code for say, high baseline inflammation, would also influence personality formation. Patterns of immunological "configuration" as well as patterns of personality.Thanks for the correction, that's the problem with stomping around in a bad mood . I've modified my post accordingly, but my conclusion that these findings are unlikely to replicate or be biologically relevant ramains.
Ok, I understand. This I believe is also known as "going fishing" in the data. If you pair enough variables, you will inevitably find correlations.Each additional test increases the chance of a false positive
I recently read this book actually. It was quite well done and well worth a read. I did however find it quite bias, toward the introvert of course. Not necessarily a bad thing, I mean, that's what it was written for right!@Beyond (and others) - you might be interested in Susan Cain's 'Quiet: The power of introversion in a world that can't stop talking'.
But my cat had to be put down today so I'm in a foul mood and might not be giving this research a fair crack.
Blood samples were then collected from each volunteer for gene expression analysis and their typical smoking, drinking, and exercise behaviors were also recorded for control purposes.