Skip to main content

When Gladwell visited the marital researcher Gottman in Blink, was Gottman able to predict marital outcomes with accuracy? Were Gladwell's...

In Chapter One of Blink, Gladwell discusses the work of University of Washington researcher John Gottman, who claims he can predict marital outcome with 95% accuracy after coding a one-hour videotape of a married couple talking (the rate is reduced to 90% if the tape is 15 minutes) (page 10). Gladwell writes of Gottman:






"He’s gotten so good at thin-slicing marriages that he says he can be in a restaurant and eavesdrop on the couple one table over and get a pretty good sense of whether they need to start thinking about hiring lawyers and dividing up custody of the children" (page 15).



Gladwell says that Gottman can take a very small sample of a marriage, what he refers to as "thin-slicing," and understand its totality, or signature. Gladwell believes that Gottman's predictions about the outcome of a marriage are accurate.


However, according to an article in Slate by Laurie Abraham (March 8, 2010), Gottman's results were misleading. Gottman knew in advance whether a couple had been divorced or not, and he fed that data into a computer to determine the formula for whether a couple would get divorced or not after six years. In other words, he wasn't so much predicting as performing a retrospective analysis. Abraham uses false-positive and false-negative rates (using Gottman's statement that he has about 80% accuracy) applied to Gottman's data from 1998 to determine that Gottman's accuracy in predicting marital outcomes is about 43%, much less than what he stated. 




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more