Their argument consists of linking an optimizely screenshot.
12 vs 24 clicks is not significant, it could’ve gone either way. Also given this minuscule sample, it’s easy to conduct p-hacking to get the desired outcome
12 vs 24 clicks is not significant, it could’ve gone either way. Also given this minuscule sample, it’s easy to conduct p-hacking to get the desired outcome
In other words, if I'm doing the math right, for him to p-hack this by rerunning the experiment in the case of no difference, he'd have to run it more than 100 times to get a 50% chance of getting as good or better significance.
There's of course plenty of other things that could be wrong outside of the simple statistical test, he could be making the numbers up, the groups might not be properly randomized etc.
Linkedin calculates an ad impression (last I checked) as 50% of the ad is on screen for at least 300ms. I can be scrolling as fast as my thumb will flick down my LinkedIn newsfeed and it would probably count.
Then the KPI being used is clicks. I don't know of any business owner who would take that as valid. It should be some kind of conversion event (newsletter signup, contact request, or purchase, etc.)
If it were up to me, I'd want 4,400 clicks and a few dozen conversion events to do my calculations on statistically significant effectiveness. Especially since the author is paying CPC (cost-per-click)... who cares about impressions at all?