Editor—Glaser thinks that low mortality levels on days 20, 26, and 12 might be linked to positive Chinese and Japanese attitudes. This suggestion is implausible. Firstly, the low mortality values on these days are not statistically significant, because the error bars for these days overlap with the regression line representing the expected mortality levels. (Because of a proofreading error, the top of the error bar for day 26 was cropped short and should have extended beyond the regression line to 67.06. Our original graph had the correct error bars, but we missed the distortion in the page proofs.) Secondly, although Chinese have a general preference for even numbers, the emotions evoked by “20,” “26,” and “12” are no more positive than for other even numbers.
Nearly all Newcombe's concerns spring from his conjecture that we noticed the fourth day peak but did not predict it, and therefore need to assess the significance of this peak with the Bonferroni correction. Newcombe acknowledges that, even with this correction, the fourth day peak remains significant. We have used and analysed the Bonferroni correction in our previous articles, but this correction is inappropriate for the current investigation because we did predict the fourth day peak.2-1,2-2 The circumstances were as follows.
The lead author (DPP) and two of his Chinese students (KK and GL) were driving past a Chinese supermarket named “Ranch 99.” DPP asked the others why “9” appeared in this name, and was told that in Mandarin “9” is pronounced identically to the word for “lasting” and is therefore an auspicious part of a business's name. DPP then asked if there were any inauspicious numbers, and was told that, in Mandarin, Cantonese, and Japanese, the number “4” is pronounced almost identically to the word for “death.” At this point, DPP predicted that Chinese and Japanese mortality would peak on the fourth of the month. This prediction sprang to mind because DPP has long used short term mortality fluctuations to seek evidence of psychosomatic processes.2-3–2-5
Incidentally, “4” is the only number between 1 and 28 with pronounced, negative connotations in Mandarin, Cantonese, and Japanese. Because the fourth day peak was predicted, one can legitimately compare mortality on the fourth (first period) with average mortality on days 1-3, 5-28 (second period). The error bar for the second period is very small and does not overlap with the error bar for the first period. This resolves Newcombe's concern about overlapping error bars.
Newcombe wonders why we focused on cardiac mortality (and ignored suicides and accidents). We adopted this focus because we wished to test a surprising hypothesis: psychological stress might trigger heart attacks. We were not interested in testing the unsurprising hypothesis that psychological stress might trigger suicide.
References
-
2-1.Phillips DP, Ruth TE, Wagner LM. Psychology and survival. Lancet. 1993;342:1142–1145. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)92124-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
2-2.Abramson I, Wolfson T, Marcotte TD, Grant I the HNRC Group. Extending the P-plot: Heuristics for multiple testing. J Int Neuropsychological Soc. 1999;5:510–517. doi: 10.1017/s1355617799566046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
2-3.Phillips DP, Feldman K. A dip in deaths before ceremonial occasions: Some new relationships between social integration and mortality. Am Sociol Rev. 1973;38:678–696. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
2-4.Phillips DP, King EW. Death takes a holiday: mortality surrounding major social occasions. Lancet. 1988;ii:728–732. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(88)90198-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
2-5.Phillips DP, Smith DG. Postponement of death until symbolically meaningful occasions. JAMA. 1990;263:1947–1951. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]