| Abstract: | A model for the standardized measurement of synchrony in behavioral or biological states was proposed for use in comparative analyses of synchrony's adaptive significance. A recent critique attempts to discredit dimensionless (unitless) or standardized measures of synchrony in general and the proposed model in particular. Although the critique helps define and sharpen thinking about the measurement of synchrony and makes some well‐taken points, it also arrives at questionable conclusions based upon dubious assumptions. The critique proceeds from a fictional example in which all biological states being considered always have exactly the same durations for all individuals and always start or end for all individuals at exactly the same instants in time. These unreal, biologically meaningless premises, together with other questionable assumptions, are the basis of inappropriate analyses of standardized measures. The critique's arguments reveal a failure to understand the basic underlying principle of the standardized method and are dependent upon faulty logic. A statistical discussion contains both worthy points and arguable comments based not on data or actual probabilities of real events but on irrelevant chance outcomes derived from the biologically meaningless assumptions. The critique's conclusions are not credible, and its basic question probably is not scientifically answerable. Am. J. Primatol. 47:29–42, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc. |
