A/B Testing. The "A" Part
An announcement to my two, possibly three, readers who have no doubt been languishing in an intellectual vacuum during my unannounced sabbatical. My time has been consumed by a project (which is going to be kickass, I promise, but may take a couple of months, and I will share it here) and my new girlfriend (ah, yes, my love life). Given that such an arrangement is notoriously short, I have decided to spend more time with her before it inevitably deteriorates into a state of mutual resentment and the awkward exchange of texts. The primary benefit thus far has been a noticeable stabilization of my own mental state, so relationship, while likely transient, continues (ok I am making it sound like a drag, but really she's lovely and in finance, thank god. Hopefully future sugar mama so I don't gotta pay muh loans).
Anywho, topic at hand. In marketing, A/B testing is a rudimentary controlled experiment in which two variants of a single variable are deployed to different audiences to determine which is more effective at achieving a desired outcome. As an exercise in morbid curiosity, I recently conducted a small social experiment. The methodology was simple: I dangled a piece of bait. A deliberately straightforward question about the rising competitiveness of specialities over time on Reddit. Yes, Reddit: land of hottakes, randomass comments, and pointless musings. I intentionally withheld my own quantitative analysis (besides mods there have a stick up their rear), which shows Ortho possesses the highest competitive "acceleration" of stats/research (SCI) of any specialty. The goal was to observe the responses when presented with a hierarchical premise but deprived of the underlying data. Would they demand evidence? Would they offer a counter-analysis? Or would they react with the emotional fragility of a toddler whose block tower has been gently nudged? (I’m “Much_Fan6021” btw)
The results were entirely predictable. Basically, in the absence of hard data, the modern medical student's default state is not intellectual curiosity, but word vomit of anecdotal evidence and wounded pride. I don't mind lash outs or call outs; in fact, a couple of users' assertions that it's Thoracic surgery is the most competitive is factually correct (in terms of match rate, it is the toughest, given the low number and self-selection). However, there was one particular user who went non-sequiter and ad hominem, which caught my attention. So I tried to irritate him some more to see if any neuron of intelligence exists in this supposed M1 or if the cadaver lab hours have left him brain dead. It seems the scientific method is the first casualty in any discussion involving ego.
I DM’ed him the data analysis. Here is how the DM went.
My response to this yahoo is as follows:
To the medical student known online as Jelousy,
It is obvious that my presentation of a data-driven analysis on residency competitiveness has caused you a significant degree of emotional distress. It has manifested as a digital outburst of Tourette-like insults, a reflexive appeal to an anonymous "upper levels," and a complete inability to engage with the topic at hand. I write to you not out of anger, but from a place of profound concern for your developing mind.
Your primary argumentative strategy, if one can call it that, was to ignore the quantitative evidence presented completely and instead invoke the supposed wisdom of your superiors via copy pasta. This is a classic appeal to authority, a logical fallacy. Try to question and be inquisitive. Because, well, you are not thinking; you are performing intellectual ventriloquism with the borrowed opinions of others.
When faced with hard data, you defaulted to the rhetorical equivalent of throwing feces. Your contributions to the discourse, such as "retard," "go masturbate," and a bizarrely confident prediction of my future M3 evaluations, are the intellectual death rattle of a losing argument. They are the textual symptoms of a brain that has encountered a novel idea, panicked, and initiated a system-wide shutdown of its higher-order cognitive functions.
Allow me to offer some unsolicited, yet necessary, advice. Before you attempt to engage in a battle of wits online, particularly on a topic for which you are so spectacularly unprepared, I suggest you first cultivate some wits to battle with. Your time would be far better spent mastering Anatomy, physiology or whatever basic science subject you are struggling with than embarrassing yourself in a public forum. The preceptors who will one day write your MSPE are not known to be impressed by an inability to distinguish data from dogma. Focus on passing your classes. The adults are talking.
Yours in Evidence-Based Reasoning,
WhiteCoatLothario.
