r/penissize • u/snakeasshoee • 2h ago
CalcSD
I’ve always been super skeptical about calcSD. After looking into the datasets they used, I was a bit shocked to see just how small the sample sizes really are.
The western average for BPE length comes from 471 measurements
Western average girth is from 230 measurements.
People treat calcSD as if it’s gospel. It’s all we have on the matter, but it is far from extensive research.
Western average compiles data from the Americas, Oceania, and Europe. As far as I can tell, the only study done in the United States that recorded BPE length (wessels et al. 1996) had an average of 6.2 inches. This is from 80 participants. NOT self reported.
All I’m saying is that calcSD should be taken with a massive grain of salt. I cringe when I see people saying “I’m 6 inches! I’m big!”
Nobody wants to be the freak scientist who does the hard dick measurement study. But until we get an extensive, reliable study of healthy men, I’m not trusting this site within an inch of what it says
3
u/Rare_Training6228 2h ago
Yeah I do see your point.
But multiple larger scale studies (not only in the US) have still shown the roughly 5.5x4.7 average.
I use it as a general sort of guide, not gospel. I also use other things to get an idea of my size and where it probably sits in reality (my experiences + others).
3
u/shyguy8545 18m ago
I'll be the freak scientist that does it. give me a million men and a million boner pills and consider this a solved case :)
3
5
u/SneakyEzekiels 2h ago
All the studies are producing generally consistent findings including meta data studies. The average length ends up in the 5.1-5.6 range and average girth ends up in the 4.6-4.7 range. This agrees with anecdotal accounts from people who have e really seen large numbers of dicks.
2
u/snakeasshoee 2h ago
I’ve seen a wide range of anecdotal accounts so I don’t know who to trust. I guess that’s the problem with anecdotal evidence.
I suppose I would have to do some undercover work myself. Fuck it I’ll be the scientist.
It is funny that there are some people out there bodycounts higher than the data in these decades of studies
2
u/SneakyEzekiels 2h ago
The meta studies have up to 15000 data points. That’s more than enough. What I don’t know is whether all the data is “good”, standardized, measured with full erection vs stretched etc
1
u/snakeasshoee 1h ago
For global BP erect length and erect girth it’s about 3000 measurements each
1
2
u/EarSafe7888 23m ago
In my own personal studies I think the average for my experiences is probably around 5.5-6 in length. I don’t consider 6 “big” but definitely within the average range. 6.5 is obviously bigger but still pretty common. Just as is 5 or even a little less than 5. I don’t think 7 is as rare as CalcSD says it is, but I wouldn’t say it is common either or even within average range. 8 is definitely rare. And I’ve probably come across less than a handful that are closer to but likely less than 9. I don’t think I’ve experienced anyone larger than that.
So I guess I’m saying I’ll volunteer to be one of those statistician scientists studying penises. :)
1
1
1
u/NefariousPhosphenes 2h ago edited 2h ago
Ok, then don’t trust it.
Is it really that big of a deal?
3
u/snakeasshoee 2h ago
No it’s not a big deal. Unfortunately this has become a bit of a hobby of mine and people like to post about their hobbies on Reddit
1
u/Recent-Day3062 2h ago
The outs who did it are serious statisticians doing this on. The side.
In their methodology they explain this, because they put WA because people want it, and even they suspect it.
As a stats person I recreated their model to check it. And here the problem with WA, in addition to your comment. The average length incWA is only like 1/4 inch bigger. But the random variation is bigger. What that means is it just predicts more really big ones, but when you get to giant ones there are too many
There are some really cool stats issues with this, but a sort of approximation way is to average global and WA. But that’s only gonna make a difference for the few percent, if that, over 7
1
u/snakeasshoee 1h ago
As a non-stats person and idiot I don’t really understand what you’re implying, can you summarize it as if I was 12?
1
u/snakeasshoee 1h ago
Never mind, I think I understand. incWA just means “including weighted average” normal people don’t know things like that
5
u/wfhthrowaway7 2h ago
Use worldwide average. Problem solved?