When You Point a Finger…
I got a D in statistics in college. Yep. I tell you that because several of you have admitted your own inadequacies when it comes to math and statistics. To be fair to me, my statistics class was at 8am in winter quarter in Davis, CA where between tule fog and rain it was always wet! I also did not own a car for half of that quarter which meant biking to class at 8am in the rain. The other half of the quarter I did own a car but was too cheap to buy a parking pass so still had to park about a mile away in a public lot and walk (in the cold rain) to class. I don’t think I need to tell you that I mostly did not attend that stats class, thus the D.
But, in truth, the few times I did attend class I was completely lost. From the very first morning I knew I was in over my head. I wondered WHY I EVEN HAD TO TAKE A STATISTICS CLASS! I was a Human Development major. Why couldn’t I just study humans? At 19 years of age I had no understanding of how numbers, statistics, to be more specific, could possibly be important to humans and our development. Unfortunately, over the course of my college career it became clear to me why I might need to better understand statistics when examining and learning from studies on growth, populations, aging, education, and other realms of, well, human development.
The book, “How to Read Numbers” by Tom Chivers and David Chivers (did anyone else continually want to cite the authors as Tim and David Chivers or was that just me?) was, for me, a refreshing look at the dreaded subject of statistics. The authors made the subject mostly understandable and even somewhat entertaining. In these days of statistic slinging it was a helpful explanation of how the numbers we see in the media are often skewed.
The lesson I learned from reading this book as it pertains to my NPO is that I need to be careful when citing statistics or using those stats to make a point. It’s going to take more work on my part to go beneath the numbers cited and figure out how the statistics were found, remembering that when dealing with mental illness (my NPO) every number represents a created, beloved, human being who may be struggling with mental health issues. I do not want to use numbers to categorize these individuals in a way that dehumanizes them. Every person with mental illness is a unique individual with their own experiences, challenges, and strengths. It’s important to remember this when discussing statistics relating to the topic. By treating mental illness statistics as representing individual humans, it can help raise awareness, reduce stigma, and promote empathy and understanding towards those who are affected by mental health conditions.
That’s all well and good and I will keep this in the front of my mind as I continue this doctoral program journey but the reason I kept flipping the pages of this book, the reason I didn’t give up after doing a quick inspectional reading of this book, is because I’m petty and I plan to use the statistics and ideas from this book the next time certain relatives of mine evangelistically share some ridiculous statistic with me about their political beliefs.
I realize that makes me sound like a jerk and maybe I am a jerk but truly, I am so tired of these relatives throwing outlandish statistics at me about how athletes are dropping dead on the soccer field because of the Covid vaccine or how Trump is the more popular candidate or how people of color are not actually oppressed. Listen, I’m not saying they or anyone else needs to share my political (or any other) beliefs. What I am saying is that their statistics are skewed and while I’ve known that since they started flinging them at me, I haven’t had the language to explain how and why they are so out of whack…until I read this book.
- They are often using anecdotal evidence. Sometimes this anecdotal evidence comes from TikTok. I’m not above using TikTok as a means for learning information about politics, our world, science, really, any topic. There are some reputable folks on TikTok who give good information. That said, one must do some digging and not just believe every story they hear. Just as “media is built around stories”[1] TikTok, a form of media, is also built around stories, any story any individual wants to share, even if that story is completely fictional. When it comes to the Covid vaccine most of us have a story about our experience. Did we get sick after the vaccine? Did we feel fine? Did someone’s Uncle Herbert die of a heart attack six months later? “No single anecdote, or even several, will give you the full picture”[2] therefore while TikTok can be one of many sources, it should not be one of your only sources nor one with equal weight to more throughly researched references.
- They will use use numbers that seem shocking but will leave out the denominator or “the context we need to work out whether it’s a big number or not.” [3] I’m pretty sure these relatives used the exact example Chivers and Chivers use in their book, according to Donald Trump, “Three hundred people are murdered by undocumented immigrants in the USA every year.” [4] That sounds like a lot of people getting murdered! After all, each of those statistics is a human being who lost a life! However, if you look at the numbers a little closer you will find (thanks to the Cato Institute) at least in Texas, “undocumented immigrants are less likely to be murderers than the average citizen.” [5] This fact is found by using a denominator or the context needed to find an accurate number.
- One last example cannot be ignored because it speaks to one of the arguments with which I am figuratively hit over the head by certain relatives. It is the hydroxychloroquine in lieu of the Covid vaccine argument. My relatives love to point to the study in which hydroxychloroquine was used to treat Covid. However, according to Chivers and Chivers, this study was not randomized and only used a total of “forty-two patients: twenty-six in the intervention group, who were given hydroxychloroquine; sixteen in the control, who weren’t.” [6] While new studies may have emerged in the past two years that confirm this result (or not), this particular study in no way could tell us if hydroxychloroquine was effective at mitigating the virus and yet. More interesting to me from this chapter was the study on whether or not swearing makes you stronger!
These are just a few examples of statistics being misused to prove a point or to win an argument. I am not innocent of doing this sort of thing myself. The conclusion of this book gives us 11 pointers on how to use statistics in a helpful, ethical way. Number eleven states: “If you get it wrong, admit it”[7] so while I am pointing the finger at certain relatives of mine for their misuse of statistics I might as well go ahead and acknowledge that when I point a finger at others, there are three others pointing right back at myself.
About the Author
Kally Elliott
Mom of four. Wanna-be Broadway star. PC(USA) pastor. Wife. Friend. Sometimes a hot mess. Sometimes somewhat together. Is this supposed to be a professional bio?7 responses to “When You Point a Finger…”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Several of us share the same “uncomfortableness” with math and statistics. Now you have some framework for engaging in discussions with “the relatives” about statistical data when the slinging happens.
I have to say, I laughed out loud when you discussed your intention to “use the statistics and ideas from this book the next time certain relatives of mine evangelistically share some ridiculous statistic with me about their political beliefs.” I can imagine similar scenarios in my world where I want to do the same! So, we are petty together.
I do wonder: even though we are armed with this great information, how do we share our new knowledge of how to consume data in a way that will be received? Back to our earlier read of Being Wrong… we are not always ready to be shown the error of our ways. What do you think?
When we read, “Being Wrong” I remember feeling like “I always assume I AM wrong!” Ha! But truly, I tend to come from a place of being slightly intimidated to engage in conversations with people throwing statistics at me because I feel like my “numbers” will be off or I simply don’t have them to begin with. Many times I am really interested in hearing the other side, especially if presented in a logical and compassionate way. I can often be convinced to see the nuance in the issues if they are presented in this way.
In the case of my relatives who would love nothing more than to convert me to their politics, I think I might push back a little more than before asking questions about the studies they quote. I might even suggest they read the book and then have a conversation about it together. I love my relatives and want to keep our relationship so my hope is not to burn bridges but to build them.
However, like I said, I am petty so I might build a bridge but keep writing about these relatives who drive me crazy!
What I love about your post, Kally, is that it’s a great example of how this program is “forcing” us to learn things we’d never pursue on our own, but that are a huge help not just in our studies, but in our personal lives as well. I’m not a numbers whiz after reading this, but gosh, I sure feel equipped to push back on dumb arguments in ways I would have been flat out intimidated to do so before.
Hi Kally,
You chose the same examples that I did, the hydroxychloroquine and the Trump example p. 65. (great minds think alike?)
Here are some big numbers for your consideration. (from my blogpost quiz).
2) U.S. refugee statistics for 2021 was __________, a 0.49% decline from 2020.
Answer: 339,179.00
3) US Foreign Born Population as of 2021, ___________, +/- 140,367
answer: 45,270,103
5) ____________ are refugees in the world (as of Mid-2022)
answer: 32.5 million
I provide these as an example of the denominator.
I enjoyed reading the causality (chpt 8) and the next of the need for the “denominator.” It is something I will strive to look for in the large numbers spouted off by our public representatives.
Thanks for your blogpot….Shalom…Russ
I too barely passed statistics in college…you are among friends!
I get really frustrated with the anecdotal evidence. I truly believe that it can add value and should be acknowledged but I have also been on the receiving end of it being used to support some ridiculous claim. I’m struggling with this because there is not a lot of data in the area of my NPO research so I will have to rely on some anecdotal evidence. Thank you for your willingness to be petty…they need to hear your voice.
I had a whole paragraph written that I took away from my blog because I was saying too much, but I also hated that I had to take statistics for my Psychology and sociology major. I did not enjoy it but it lead me to enjoying Experimental Psych so much that I continued my experiment for an extra semester as independent study. And yet…I still did not want to read this book. However, numbers are all around us, and I appreciate that you talked about how numbers can’t tell us anything about the individual, such a mental illness. My son with Autism, we always say if you’ve met a person with autism, you met a person, not one case looks like the others therefore can’t be boxed in with “cures” or “treatments”, just percentages and odds of improvement. Thank you Kally for your confession…I’m there with you. Fighting the “research” is hard with Covid…I had more conversations around that than I wanted to. When you stated “when you get it wrong, admit it”. What an amazing gift of vulnerability that would be, when have you heard leaders admit it they were wrong?