It's the same in any high-intensity career - actors, musicians, anyone who wants to be the best at something will make personal sacrificesSorry to be a pain again, but I had to dig into this one too! 'Have to consider what the authors' noted: "Maybe people prone to unstable relationships are drawn to certain professions."
Dancers and choreographers registered the highest divorce rates (43.1 percent), followed by bartenders (38.4 percent) and massage therapists (38.2 percent). Also in the top 10 were casino workers, telephone operators, nurses and home health aides.
Three types of engineers -- agricultural, sales and nuclear engineers -- were represented among the 10 occupations with the lowest divorce rates. Also reporting low marital breakup rates were optometrists (4 percent), clergy (5.6 percent) and podiatrists (6.8 percent).
The numbers don't paint a complete picture. If a person had divorced and remarried by the time of the Census, they would be counted as married. So it could be the case that people in some occupations are just quicker to jump into the next marriage than others.
The authors also point out that the data don't reveal whether it's the nature of the jobs that lead to divorce, or if people prone to unstable relationships are drawn to certain professions.
With a divorce rate around 40-50%, it would be hard to imagine that much "intensity" is to blame. It's probably much closer to just poor choices and bad behaviors.There's no doubt that all sorts of other factors come in to play, but the divorce rate figure you toss out may be inflated, I suspect. It's hard to get a clear cut stat on the matter. Ditto for the percentage of gays and for people sexually abused as children. Since all those are emotionally stressful, if someone comes along saying that a large percentage of the population is affected, the figure will be repeated and not be questioned by the victims because it makes them feel better, knowing that they are not alone.
...but the divorce rate figure you toss out may be inflated, I suspect. It's hard to get a clear cut stat on the matter.Actually no it isn't. Since it is a purely state legal matter, the numbers should be the most accurate available. Other things you mention are all dependent on self-reporting. Neither marriage nor divorce are, since they are a formally defined legal status.
Actually no it isn't. Since it is a purely state legal matter, the numbers should be the most accurate available.On the surface, they should seem so. But divorce is something that can happen over the course of a life time and rates constantly change. If you consider only people of a very ripe age, the stats reveal a rate that is considerably below 40-50%. Of course one can argue that the rate for people nowadays is higher. But the 50% figure often thrown around is a projection because, even for younger couples, the rate is not as high as that.
The total divorce rate was down slightly from its peak of about 41 per cent in the mid 1980s, but slightly higher than the rate of about 37 per cent recorded in the mid 1990s.The variation in regions is significant, so it's silly for couples to think of themselves threatened by overall average projections :
Newfoundland and Labrador had the lowest rate of divorce at 21.6 per cent — while Quebec had the highest at 48.4 per cent. (if you dig under the surface of these numbers, as i did, they turn out to be projections too)
the detectors at the LHC use triggers and only record a fraction of all the events.
If we say that e.g. 10/fb of events have been analyzed, does that include the non-recorded events?
Furthermore, the triggers will create a selection bias, how is that considered when subtracting the background
e.g. in a search for new particles (since by definition we don't know what really happened in those non-recorded
events)?