N=1?

chelny

Could someone please define this for me? I think I understand what is meant based on the context, but I’m not sure. Thanks

MikePTY

N=1 means a one person sample size, usually referring to oneself. So when someone says something is "N=1", it means that something is an observation based off of one person's personal experience, not something that scientifically backed as a result for people in general.

chelny

Thanks!

NovusDies

It also means that determining cause and effect can be highly biased.

I eat moderately low carb. My cholesterol is better. N=1: Moderate carb diets fix cholesterol.

Or they can just be completely incorrect:

I use a lot of ACV in my salads. I am losing weight. N=1: ACV causes weight loss.

This is not a hard and fast rule but for the most part the people that use N=1 the most at MFP are the ones that seem to have the most biases towards eating methodologies.

paperpudding

What do you mean by the most bias toward eating methodologies??

I don't think I have any bias toward any particular eating methodology - I certainly don't follow any particular diet method myself - ie not clean eating, not keto, not paleo etc

And I use the term N=1 sometimes - basically meaning the conclusion or experiment applies only to one person, myself.

Eg skipping breakfast leads to fatigue and nausea by mid morning, N =1.
Ie it applies to me.

OP! The term derives from study terminology where you might see an experiment about medication effectiveness, for example, and see the term N = 1000.( or whatever)
Meaning the size of people involved was 1000.
Generally the larger the sample size, the more likely the conclusion can be applied as a general population rule.

NovusDies

paperpudding wrote: »

What do you mean by the most bias toward eating methodologies??

I don't think I have any bias toward any particular eating methodology - I certainly don't follow any particular diet method myself - ie not clean eating, not keto, not paleo etc

And I use the term N=1 sometimes - basically meaning the conclusion or experiment applies only to one person, myself.

Eg skipping breakfast leads to fatigue and nausea by mid morning, N =1.
Ie it applies to me.

OP! The term derives from study terminology where you might see an experiment about medication effectiveness, for example, and see the term N = 1000.( or whatever)
Meaning the size of people involved was 1000.
Generally the larger the sample size, the more likely the conclusion can be applied as a general population rule.

Did I single you out without realizing it? Did I forget to say it wasn't a hard and fast rule? I was sure I said that which meant it didn't apply to all posters. I was referring mainly to people who believe that IF and/or keto can perform miracles that should, in some cases (or many cases), be attributed to weight loss.

apullum

NovusDies wrote: »

paperpudding wrote: »

What do you mean by the most bias toward eating methodologies??

I don't think I have any bias toward any particular eating methodology - I certainly don't follow any particular diet method myself - ie not clean eating, not keto, not paleo etc

And I use the term N=1 sometimes - basically meaning the conclusion or experiment applies only to one person, myself.

Eg skipping breakfast leads to fatigue and nausea by mid morning, N =1.
Ie it applies to me.

OP! The term derives from study terminology where you might see an experiment about medication effectiveness, for example, and see the term N = 1000.( or whatever)
Meaning the size of people involved was 1000.
Generally the larger the sample size, the more likely the conclusion can be applied as a general population rule.

Did I single you out without realizing it? Did I forget to say it wasn't a hard and fast rule? I was sure I said that which meant it didn't apply to all posters. I was referring mainly to people who believe that IF and/or keto can perform miracles that should, in some cases (or many cases), be attributed to weight loss.

I was confused by the comment too, because I thought it meant "People who use the term N=1 on the forums are biased toward certain ways of eating." That may be how @paperpudding was reading it.

However, I've read enough of your posts that I was pretty sure that wasn't what you meant, so I assumed you meant "People often use personal anecdotes on the forums to argue that certain ways of eating are better than others," which I think is true.

I can see where the confusion came from, but I think you are both actually on the same page

NovusDies

I probably should have been more clear. I was fairly sleep deprived yesterday.

Not to mention... message board.

paperpudding

Yes it read that way to me.

No I didnt think you were singling me out, I just didnt understand what you meant and couldnt see the connection myself
and used myself as an example of someone who sometimes uses the term and the sort of thing I might say it with.

and explained terminology further to OP and any other readers.

NovusDies

paperpudding wrote: »

Yes it read that way to me.

No I didnt think you were singling me out, I just didnt understand what you meant and couldnt see the connection myself
and used myself as an example of someone who sometimes uses the term and the sort of thing I might say it with.

and explained terminology further to OP and any other readers.

I was trying to further explain how n=1 was not to be taken as firm evidence but I guess it was left too open for interpretation. That won't be the first or last time that happens.

Motorsheen

At least it's not Toilet Paper Math.....

psychod787

Lol.... I get strange looks from people when I say n=1 at the gym. Lol

chelny

Motorsheen wrote: »

At least it's not Toilet Paper Math.....

MFP needs a "funny" or laughing reaction.

kshama2001

apullum wrote: »

NovusDies wrote: »

paperpudding wrote: »

What do you mean by the most bias toward eating methodologies??

I don't think I have any bias toward any particular eating methodology - I certainly don't follow any particular diet method myself - ie not clean eating, not keto, not paleo etc

And I use the term N=1 sometimes - basically meaning the conclusion or experiment applies only to one person, myself.

Eg skipping breakfast leads to fatigue and nausea by mid morning, N =1.
Ie it applies to me.

OP! The term derives from study terminology where you might see an experiment about medication effectiveness, for example, and see the term N = 1000.( or whatever)
Meaning the size of people involved was 1000.
Generally the larger the sample size, the more likely the conclusion can be applied as a general population rule.

Did I single you out without realizing it? Did I forget to say it wasn't a hard and fast rule? I was sure I said that which meant it didn't apply to all posters. I was referring mainly to people who believe that IF and/or keto can perform miracles that should, in some cases (or many cases), be attributed to weight loss.

I was confused by the comment too, because I thought it meant "People who use the term N=1 on the forums are biased toward certain ways of eating." That may be how @paperpudding was reading it.

However, I've read enough of your posts that I was pretty sure that wasn't what you meant, so I assumed you meant "People often use personal anecdotes on the forums to argue that certain ways of eating are better than others," which I think is true.

I can see where the confusion came from, but I think you are both actually on the same page

Yes, I went through exactly the same thought process.

The first time I read it I thought it meant "People who use the term N=1 on the forums are biased toward certain ways of eating."

But being familiar with the poster I gave it a second read and also concluded he meant "People often use personal anecdotes on the forums to argue that certain ways of eating are better than others," which I think is true.