View Single Post
Old 08-26-2012, 06:23 PM   #141
VydorScope
Wizard
VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.VydorScope ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
VydorScope's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,418
Karma: 35207650
Join Date: Jun 2011
Device: iPad
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan View Post
Does it? It could be that if those customers were already sexually experimentive, they were merely introduced to new toys to support an existing habit. For those people, I'd say their behavior was not changed, any more than the person who learned a new word from reading a book and started using it himself had changed their behavior.

Not to mention the fact that buying the toys doesn't mean that they'll be used. The partner could easily refuse to participate, and that's a lot of blindfolds, whips and such in the trash.

Anyway, that's a devil's advocate argument, take it as you like.
Its a bit silly cause this thread pretty much is...

Jane read <book> and did <action> so book influenced her.

vs

Jane read <book> and did <action> but she would have anyways.

That can never be resolved in the SPECIFIC case like that.

In the general case if <book> comes out promoting <stuff> and suddenly <stuff> is more popular for a non-trivial sample, then it is reasonable to state that <book> influenced the population with regard to <stuff>. That is the basic premise behind this kind of research.
VydorScope is offline   Reply With Quote