zlacker

>>azhenl+(OP)
I regret causing confusion here. It turns out that this correlation was true on the initial small data set, but after gathering more data, the correlation went away. So the real lesson should be: "if you gather data on a lot of low-frequency events, some of them will display a spurious correlation, about which you can make up a story."

>>norvig+R9
So can you now say with some confidence that competition performance doesn't correlate with job performance? That's still kind of interesting, although less so than the original conclusion.

The explanation of the effect did seem a bit too convenient.