Fear of taking statistics is normal — like this curve. But you can do something this summer to make it easier.
Two of the topics that I most enjoyed teaching as a social science professor were Statistics and Research Methods. Statistics, in particular, scares the hell out of some students. I’m here to suggest something to you this summer than can make it much easier for you — without subjecting yourself to the terrors of numbers.
Purchase, borrow, rent, or steal (not really steal) — and then read — the following 300 page paperback book:
“The Elementary Forms of Statistical Reason,” by Cuzzort and Vrettos.
I see that Amazon is selling used copies for as little as a penny plus shipping.
Read it before you go. It’s an entire book about concepts of statistics that contains only a single (unavoidable, but bearable) equation, the Binomial Theorem. Other than that, it’s about how to conceive of notions like the central tendency and variability/diversity of a distribution, the differences between describing and making an inference from that description, types of variables, and measuring the associations between variables and the effects of causative variables upon others, and how to think about probability and causality.
THIS IS STUFF YOU ALREADY KNOW ABOUT! You just haven’t learned to think about it as formally — or, and I know my saying this may rankle you, AS WELL — as you’re about to.
Some wonderful people — many of them dedicated to using knowledge to solve social problems — have dedicated their lives to assessing and refining these concepts. They believe that those of us on the side of truth and proof want the tools we can use to establish both to be as good as possible. As activist should respect those efforts. Disagree with them, sure — you’ll have plenty of company. But the basics — the sorts of things in this non-math book — apply to qualitative as well as quantitative research.
You need to understand these concepts — not so much because it will make you a better student, or a better person, or even a better activist.
They will make you a better researcher, a better critic, and better able to convey what you know. You may not like the math, and most of that can be consigned to a computer, but finally understanding what you already know but haven’t been able to articulate — that’s what statistical reasoning is about — will blow your mind.
If I know you, I can loan you the $3.50 until January. But that’s part of a terrible deal on my part — because my condition is that, when your class is over, you have to pay me what it’s worth!
Mark Twain: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
No that was President Harry “buck stops here” Truman.
That phrase had many potential fathers, Mark Twain being the most popular. He used it but didn’t claim authorship.
*Did we say we loved Give Em Hell Harry?
He DID use it? I didn’t know the misuse of statistics was such a problem back in Twain’s day.
By the way, I’ll take honestly-used statistics over argument by anecdote any day – and there’s WAY too much of that these days. Maybe the article above says the same; haven’t had a chance to read it yet.
*Ever heard of good old Samuel Clemens? We love his coonskin cap; went to school with Ron but doesnt’ return our calls any….. more!
*Changed our major because we didn’t want to take that stupid Statistics class! Went with Philosophy and International Relations instead!
I learned that the odds are always in favor of the house.
*Roulette, craps, poker, shooting marbles and pitching pennies! We have done it all. It all goes to prove one thing: Don’t buy the Time Share!
If government agents and their political overlords were forced to not only understand but deploy statistics to support their harebrained ideas and defend their “gut” instincts, we’d have had a whole lot less trouble around here.
Permission to correct this excellent comment to “…to understand statistics rather than deploying them to…”? Or your own suggested rewrite?
No, because at the County, for instance, they don’t even misuse statistics. Don’t bother with ’em at all. They just collect data once in a while, most of it selective, and pass it off as statistical analysis.
Small minds like Mrs. Bates and Janet Nguyen routinely refer to this comical process as “metrics.” Moorlach is actually as bad as the rest of them, routinely confusing his own biased musings with analysis.
It’s better to understand statistics than not, hopefully that keeps you from being a victim of their misuse.
Like the old “Chicago is the murder capital of the USA” (per capita it’s like #20.) And at the other extreme, to say last year “Newtown Connecticut is the murder capital of the USA.”
Re. Chicago murder rate – “This dramatic crime reduction has been happening even as the department has been bleeding officers .. the crime reduction “makes no sense,” says one veteran sergeant. “And it makes absolutely no sense that people believe it. Yet people believe it.””
The Truth About Chicago’s Crime Rates
The city’s drop in crime has been nothing short of miraculous. Here’s what’s behind the unbelievable numbers.
BY DAVID BERNSTEIN AND NOAH ISACKSON
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/May-2014/Chicago-crime-rates/
Good article!
It remains to be seen what other agencies are playing the same reduction game with those reports.
It reminds me of certain city councilperson who has made claims that crime was down, from the dais, on multiple occasions, when some of us privy to the daily records questioned the reports.
Great article- thanks!
*Understanding Trends, Focus Groups, Survey’s, White Washing Arguments and worse than that: Risk Assessments….all prove that Statistics never work. Or worse yet……always work in favor of the one doing the assessments. Just ask the folks at Gallup and Pew. You know, the ones that get paid! Notice how every website with a product wants your opinion? They never reveal the results and never tell you why they want to know how many kids you have or how long you have lived at your present residence. How long you have been on the job or whether you are self employed. Hardly matters….why you go to Walmart …eh?
*Understanding Trends, Focus Groups, Survey’s, White Washing Arguments and worse than that: Risk Assessments….all prove that Statistics never work.
No, all that stuff proves that people will fall for anything, especially an emotional sales pitch masquerading as logic.
*Did we say we just loved…Elmer Gantry!? Wow. And Burt lancaster!
*Did we say we just loved…Elmer Gantry!? Wow. And Burt lancaster!
Ironic on Mother’s Day-Shirley Jones sure didn’t play the role of Mrs. Partridge in that flick!
To steal a phrase form CSI, “Evidence without context has no meaning.” Its the same for stats; despite the aura of fact, they have to placed in the proper context to have any meaning. And, alas, that’s where the spin doctors work their magic. One could say simply the price of a No. 2 pencil doubled from 5 cents to 10 cents; or you can go for the shock value and tell everyone the cost of a pencil increased by 100%.
As Mr. Zenger points out, the “metrics” buzzword means little if what you’re measuring has no value. A real metric measures value or outcome rather than simple output or result. It sounds arcane, but it has real-world consequences.
*Elmer Gantry: “Then I rammed the fear of God right into her!” As a 13 year old……I did pass out on the spot – at the Fullerton Fox Theater! The following week we watched Carmen Jones….with Harry Belefonte and Dorthy Dandridge! Tough duty on an emerging teen…believe you me! Statistics…….yeah…..plenty of those!
Statistically speaking, there is a 100 percent chance you will die during your life time.
As we both know Rob, when you look at it up close you might get a little more motivated than the stats would suggest prudent.
We all want to beat those 5 year stats!
Stay stubborn!
Good book.
As a statistics fan myself, as I mature, I have been impressed by the FREAKANOMICS guys.
But, more so, as a human and recognizing KINDNESS absent from so much of what we do, I think that a more important personal attribute is humility. In other words, you may have the NUMBERS on your side, hands down. But if no one likes you because you are obnoxious, obtrusive, rude and UNKIND. The numbers won’t add up.
I think there was a dinosaur movie that exemplified this nicely.
There is always the oddball asshole (who is right), how else do you explain the Steve Rocco’s and Nameless’ of the world?
Surprised this classic wasn’t mentioned ! (Greg, I will have to run to Amazon for yours!)
http://www.horace.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/How-to-Lie-With-Statistics-1954-Huff.pdf
I own a copy. It’s good — and funny — but the Cuzzort book will teach people stats.
White House Wanted Geithner to Lie on Sunday Shows
Geithner: “I remember during one Roosevelt Room prep session before I appeared on the Sunday shows, I objected when Dan Pfeiffer wanted me to say Social Security didn’t contribute to the deficit – that It wasn’t a main driver of our future deficits, but it did contribute.”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/geithner-white-house-wanted-me-lie-sunday-shows_791273.html
Finding out that Geithner doesn’t know that Social Security is not calculated as part of the federal budget deficit — it’s its own fund, with a huge surplus that people like Geithner think that they should be able to raid, so it “contributes to the deficit” like keeping a bank’s money in a vault contributes to poverty — is no surprise. He’s one of Obama’s absolutely worst appointments, down there with Arne Duncan.
“..White House budget documents (see Table S-4) show that on an annual basis, Social Security outlays exceed Social Security payroll taxes, thus boosting the bottom line federal deficit. The fact that the system is running a negative cash flow now — and the foreseeable future — is an important warning sign of fiscal imbalance.”
WaPo –
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/updating-a-ruling-social-security-and-its-role-in-the-nations-debt/2012/11/29/1cd3e8aa-3a68-11e2-8a97-363b0f9a0ab3_blog.html
Raise the cap on taxable income. Fixed.
BOOM.
A huge Social Security surplus was built up specifically to deal with the retirement years of the Baby Boomers — this was the time that it was supposed to be spent down. Unfortunately, people like you decided to “borrow” it — remember people making fun of Al Gore and his “lockbox” for the Social Security surplus? — and now complain about having to pay it back. I’m just glad that we shut down the attempts of people like you to privatize Social Security and put it into the hands of the people who tanked our economy six years ago — people like Geithner.
That is the most illogical, convoluted & nonsensical “reasoning” I have ever encountered – it is not worthy of a response.
If you don’t understand something, ask for an explanation rather than cowering.
Do you even remember Al Gore’s “lockbox” idea in the 2000 election? SNL even made fun of it. What do you think it was about?
Off to Google (and to copying articles from dishonest and misleading sources verbatim) you go!
It’s too bad that the current baby boomers (much larger than the 1945 to 1965 babies) can not pay into Soc Sec like the prior ones due to a new economy of low paying jobs, nowhere degrees from expensive schools, and a bad work attitude.
Don’t worry, it will turn out just fine from your perspective: they’re being hounded into peonage and serfdom.