Are you good with numbers? versus Do numbers excite you?
My Relationship with Numbers
Are you good with numbers? Are you a numbers person? Are you a writer or mathematician? I’ve heard these questions asked many times. It always felt a bit limiting to me. I never understood why you had to be one or the other. But I just accepted that being good at one meant that you could not be good at the other. For years I bought into the notion that you were naturally either a numbers person or not. I love reading and writing, I always have. So, for me, that meant that I could not be a numbers person. If you tell yourself something enough times, it becomes your inner narrative. Numbers and Math were that way for me. I embraced the idea that anything outside of reading and writing, which meant math and science, were areas that I would struggle with. So, I worked extra hard in those subjects desperately trying to defy my inner narrative. I completed an MBA, in part to prove that I can do the hard things, and because it made me more marketable (or so I believed). It turns out that the MBA, Math, Statistics and Accounting are not that hard. They are just not as interesting to me as Reading and Writing. I wish the questions had been phrased differently. Not, “Are you good with numbers?” but, “Do numbers excite you?” Hearing it that way would have saved me a great deal of grief around where my natural capabilities lie. If we believe what we are told and only what we are told, there is a danger of never exploring the truth for ourselves. How to Read Numbers is an invitation to learn how to understand and interpret numbers and statistics for ourselves.
Can we Trust it?
I expected How to Read Numbers to be dense, confusing, and not very interesting, I anticipated a truly unpleasant experience. I was so surprised by how much I enjoyed this book. What a refreshing approach to statistics! The information/statistics that have been prevalent in the news over the last three years have been so hard to digest. It’s been like drinking numbers from a fire hydrant on full blast. From COVID-19 Infection and Death to Election Numbers to Economic Growth/Decline Statistics, we have received steady flow of information that has both overwhelming and disheartening. The large numbers can be scary, especially as they relate to mortality rate and quality of life. I found this example very helpful when interpreting COVID numbers, “When is a number a big number? There’s no such thing, really. Or rather: the bigness or otherwise of a number depends entirely on its context. A hundred is a big number of people to have in your house, but it’s a small number of stars in the galaxy. Two is a small number of hairs on your head, but it’s a huge number of lifetime of Nobel Prizes, or gunshot wounds to the stomach.”(1) COVID-19 infection rate and death rate numbers were large and growing daily. My primary source of information was the entire internet and every news station. The CDC was and has been a wealth of information on Covid-19 Statistics. I remember turning on the TV every morning for up-to-date numbers throughout 2020. I had a difficult time imagining that one virus could cause so much devastation. Covid-19 was the third leading cause of death overall, accounting for more than 10% of all deaths in 2020. Final death data from the CDC shows that Covid-19 was the underlying cause of death for 350,831 people in 2020.(2) 350,831 deaths from one virus was unbelievable at the time (unfortunately the number it is so much higher now). When presented with a number this large it is easy to panic. According to the Census Bureau, in 2020 the population of the US was 359.5 million. Both numbers are large, and your perspective will be based on how you choose to interpret them. Statistically the COVID-19 deaths in 2020 represented .1% of the total US population. I can hear my sceptic friends saying, “The numbers don’t lie. This virus killed less than 1% of the population!” It is true, numbers don’t lie but they can be presented in a way to support an argument or viewpoint. They can be combined and sliced to make a particular point or paint a certain picture. 350,831 is a lot of lives lost, and you are especially sensitive to that if one of your Loved Ones is among that number.
What is the Truth?
You have to seek the truth and be open to what you find. It is easy to believe what the media feeds you or what you are told. The headlines of news cycles are designed to lure you in. Big, bold, and shocking news bytes are what keeps us tuning in. There are more than enough fake news outlets and social media platforms that provide a continuous flow of information. Overconsumption of information can happen and can blur the lines between what is fact and what is being presented as fact. I have been on the receiving end of far too many heated conversations with individuals using statistics that have been taken out of context and presented as facts. It is important to dig deeper, do your own research, and interpret and present it responsibly. I found three statements particularly useful.
1) Put numbers into context(3)
2) Be careful about saying or implying that something causes something else(4)
3) If you get it wrong, admit it(5)
These are not only guiding principles for interpreting statistics and reporting numerically responsible figures but can also help guide us in all aspects of our life.
1. Tom Chivers and David Chivers, How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News (and Knowing When to Trust Them) (London:
Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2022), 63.
2. “Tracking Covid-19 Cases in the US,” CNN (Cable News Network), accessed February 9, 2023,
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/health/coronavirus-us-maps-and-cases/.
3. Tom Chivers and David Chivers, How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News (and Knowing When to Trust Them) (London:
Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2022), 166.
4. IBID.168
5. IBID.169
About the Author
Jonita Fair-Payton
8 responses to “Are you good with numbers? versus Do numbers excite you?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yes! I loved your (re)phrasing of “are you good with numbers” to “do numbers excite you.” That perspective would have given me much more hope in my younger years, especially during battles I would have with certain disciplines within the “math” family.
I resonate with your perspective on how numbers can be manipulated to paint a particular picture. As I read Chivers and Chivers, I found myself thinking about how much of my past research in the organization(s) I’ve served was “sliced and diced” to portray a picture of what I assumed to be a big deal based on anecdotal evidence.
You said that you enjoyed this book. Is there one or two things in particular that you think you might add to the research for your NPO project? One thing that stood out to me as I read it — I am going to have to be aware of sampling size with my topic. The caution to be wary of surveys of less than 100 people makes me think I need to broaden the scope of my research a bit.
There is not a lot of research on my NPO topic. I am going to have to rely on some anecdotal evidence…I share your concern with sampling size. This book has given me a lot to think about and added a few additional research concerns to my list.
Hi Jonita,
For me, the answer to both your questions is no! I really hate to admit that! I love your journey of self discovery with numbers and math. I am realizing I am not as bad with numbers as I always believed. I am grateful to have more tools to glean the information numbers provide. My inner narrative has become a little more positive. I now have a handy guide! What excites you about numbers going into your research?
I am grateful for all the additional tools that we are gaining. I am looking forward to what’s next…I love that with each week we pick up something that is useful for our projects.
Numbers really are relative to their context. Chivers gave the example of very large amount of sewage being dumped into the ocean from a particular country, then gave how many tons of water is actually in the ocean which puts things into perspective. Still not great, but it was presented in a way that would grab peoples attention and could blow things out of proportion with no context. That seems to be the name of the game. Click bait!
I’m with you, numbers are crucial to make sense of our world, but in general, they don’t make me come alive like a good history book on the ancient world! Weird I know.
Exactly…Click Bait! Unfortunately, so many people consider what they hear in sound bites and read in headlines/social media feeds as facts. I was having a conversation with a young person (late 20’s) and I was in shock and really saddened by what I heard. It was disappointing that her information and source was from a social media chat but what was more disturbing was that she was presenting it/ defending it as fact. She fully believed it because “several” people on the chat agreed also. I spent a lot of time listening to her… and more time asking her to walk me through what she was saying. I had to resist the urge of telling her, “stop believing everything that read on social media!”
It’s interesting the things we learn about ourselves as we mature and even the interests that we never knew we had. I can’t recall the direction of your NPO; how numbers-heavy is your research? Have you run across misleading statistics in your reading around your NPO so far? How will you handle your own treatment of the research to make sure you fall into the same traps?
Hi Kim! My NPO is focused on the sociological factors impacting black women leading in white religious spaces in Texas. I don’t believe that my research will be very numbers-heavy as there is just not a lot of research done on this topic. I am a bit uneasy that I may have to rely on some anecdotal evidence. I will keep you posted on the how the research unfolds.