But are statistical conclusions really necessary? Or the only conclusions that matter?
I look at it from a market perspective: she had to compete with a lot of people for that position. If an MBA was a disadvantage, would she win that position?
Of course, there are many factors for why she got her position. But I doubt that she strictly speaking knows which of them contributed and which of them didn't.
> But are statistical conclusions really necessary? Or the
> only conclusions that matter?
They are in the sense that without any further information, let's make other claims:
- Would she really be the COO of Facebook if she wasn't a woman?
- Would she really be the COO of Facebook if she wasn't an Harvard alumna?
- Would she really be the COO of Facebook if she wasn't Jewish?
.
.
.
> there are many factors for why she got her position. But
> I doubt that she strictly speaking knows which of them
> contributed
Precisely; nor do we. There seems little point speculating. (However something statistical like 'x% tech COOs have an MBA' would be more interesting).
