I agree with the point here. This is slightly unrelated, but I don’t think the BKS carries that much validity as a survey. I don’t have a degree in statistics though, so take all this with a grain of salt.
I’ve spent a lot of time playing around with the BKS viewer, only to find that the data is very polluted by response and selection bias (for proof (primarily of the former) here, just look at the IQ score section). I find it difficult to get any useful information that I know is “true” because of this.
The survey then could have a million biases—not just self-selection towards kinkiness like you said—but stuff like women not honestly representing their preference for dominance or submission (because of societal pressure or the “expected” thing she would say about it), or maybe that women who watch pornographic material are themselves a subset of women with statistically significant different sexual preferences, or maybe a bunch of people went in and put random lies (e.g. “I am a 400-foot tall female platypus bear with a preference to be dominated”) because they hate accurate data collection.
While you might be able to correct away self-selection issues with weighing, I can’t think of a post hoc way to correct for response bias (maybe weighing actually, but against a known distribution like IQ, throwing out or “compressing” samples that don’t align, not just in IQ but using IQ as a guide).
I agree with the point here. This is slightly unrelated, but I don’t think the BKS carries that much validity as a survey. I don’t have a degree in statistics though, so take all this with a grain of salt.
I’ve spent a lot of time playing around with the BKS viewer, only to find that the data is very polluted by response and selection bias (for proof (primarily of the former) here, just look at the IQ score section). I find it difficult to get any useful information that I know is “true” because of this.
The survey then could have a million biases—not just self-selection towards kinkiness like you said—but stuff like women not honestly representing their preference for dominance or submission (because of societal pressure or the “expected” thing she would say about it), or maybe that women who watch pornographic material are themselves a subset of women with statistically significant different sexual preferences, or maybe a bunch of people went in and put random lies (e.g. “I am a 400-foot tall female platypus bear with a preference to be dominated”) because they hate accurate data collection.
While you might be able to correct away self-selection issues with weighing, I can’t think of a post hoc way to correct for response bias (maybe weighing actually, but against a known distribution like IQ, throwing out or “compressing” samples that don’t align, not just in IQ but using IQ as a guide).