> Statistically
You got anything to back up that claim? That sounds like a pretty big conclusion that you're jumping to without evidence.
You got anything to back up that claim? That sounds like a pretty big conclusion that you're jumping to without evidence.
It's not a "claim". It's literally the null hypothesis: two traits are assumed to be uncorrelated unless proven otherwise.
If you want to claim that a sense of "impostor syndrome" is actually indicative of increased skill, it's your job to prove it.
It's not a "claim". It's literally the null hypothesis: two traits are assumed to be uncorrelated unless proven otherwise.
If you want to claim that a sense of "impostor syndrome" is actually indicative of increased skill, it's your job to prove it.
Also, again: null hypothesis. If you want to argue that there's a positive correlation between X & Y, you provide evidence.