Statistics - deceptive?

1
Statistics - deceptive?

• Authors often provide statistics to support their
  reasoning, and the statistics appear to be hard
  evidence.
• However, there are many ways that statistics can
  be misused
• Because problematic statistics are used
  frequently, it is important to identify any
  problems with them

2
Statistics assessment clues 1

1. Try to find out as much as you can about how the
   statistics were obtained. Ask How does the
   author know?
2. Be curious about the type of average being
   described
3. Be alert to users of statistics concluding one
   thing, but proving another
4. Blind yourself to the authors statistics and
   compared the needed statistical evidence with the
   statistics actually provided

3
Decision Making do recommend

• The thinking involved in deciding what to do, or
  in recommending a course of action, or weighing
  someone elses recommendation, needs special
  attention since it is very common, is often
  important, and has to be evaluated in a
  distinctive way.
• We are all used to making decisions, but
  sometimes we do that less skilfully than we might.

4
Decision Making personal policy

• We are interested in decisions about substantial
  matters, such as personal ones, like which
  university to go to, what to study, whether to
  take a job, whether to become vegetarian.
• And also policy decisions, like whether cannabis
  should be legalized, boxing banned, fox-hunting
  with hounds made illegal, or whether parents
  should be punished when their children break the
  law, abortion permitted, and so on.

5
Decision Making react deliberate

• Sometimes decisions have to be taken very quickly
  perhaps to deal with an emergency and then
  one just needs to act, or react.
• But often we have do have time to think, or
  deliberate, and, if the decision matters, the
  question is how to make a good decision rather
  than a poor or a worse one.
• Nevertheless, one should not think forever, and
  often a timed-out combination of deliberation and
  reaction is called for.

6
Decision Making evaluate satisfice

• It is common to say that the optimum is the
  enemy of the good. That striving for the
  optimum may end up consuming all our time and
  effort, without a decision being reached
• Striving for the sufficiently good, simply
  satisficing, could have been conducive to an
  appropriate and timely decision and action
• Evaluation itself involves an expenditure, in
  time and resources, that must be taken into
  account as part a decisions cost

7
Decision Making common flaws 1

• Did not give the matter enough thought
• Did the first thing we thought of
• Didnt think of possible alternatives
• Didnt consider the consequences of various
  courses of action

8
Decision Making common flaws 2

• Needed to get some more information
• Was too hasty
• Was too emotionally involved
• Did what the boss said
• Accepted without thinking what others suggested

9
Decision Making thinking map 1

1. What makes this decision Necessary? Objectives?
2. What is Recommended and on what Grounds?
3. What are the Options/Alternatives? Realistic or
   unusual?
4. What are the Possible Consequences of the various
   options and How Likely are they? (On the basis
   of what evidence and how reliable is it?)

10
Decision Making thinking map 2

1. How Important are these consequences for all
   those affected?
2. When I Compare the alternatives in the light of
   the consequences, which is best? Is the
   recommended course best?
3. How can I carry out this decision? (Contingency
   plans?)
4. Is the decision taking too long and what is the
   cost of that? Is there a satisficing solution?

11
Decision Making summary 1

• The thinking involved in making decisions or in
  recommending a course of action deserves special
  attention.
• We often do this poorly because we jump to a
  decision and afterwards rationalise it.
• To make decisions well and avoid the common
  weaknesses, we need to consider a reasonable
  range of options and their possible consequences
  before coming to a decision or an advice.

12
Decision Making summary 2

• Getting clear what the problem is may necessitate
  formulating objectives.
• In thinking of consequences we need to be as
  imaginative as possible, but also to judge
  carefully how likely they are, and how valuable,
  to come to a rational decision.
• To do this we may also need to undertake some
  investigations and take account of moral
  considerations.

13
Omitted information - 1

• By asking questions brought up in other sections,
  such as concerning ambiguity, assumptions, and
  evidence, we will detect much important missing
  information
• A more complete search for omitted information,
  however, is so important to critical evaluation
  that it deserves additional emphasis
• Next we further sensitise to the importance of
  what is not said and remind that we react to an
  incomplete picture of an argument when we
  evaluate only the explicit parts

14
Omitted information - 2

• Almost any information we encounter has a
  purpose. Its organization was selected and
  established by someone who hoped that it would
  affect our thinking in some designed way
• Those trying to persuade us will almost always
  try to present their position in the strongest
  possible light
• It is wise to hesitate and think about what an
  author may not have told us, something our
  critical questioning has not yet revealed

15
Omitted information - 3

• Omitted information is inevitable, for at least
  five reasons
• Time and space limitations
• Limited attention span
• Inadequacies inhuman knowledge
• Deception
• Existence of different perspectives

16
Clues for finding omitted information

• Common counterarguments
• What reasons would someone who disagrees offer?
• Are there research studies that contradict the
  studies presented?
• Are there missing examples, testimonials, or
  analogies that support the other side of the
  argument?
• Missing definitions How would the arguments
  differ if key terms were defined in other ways?

17
Clues for finding omitted information

• Missing value preferences or perspectives
• From what other set of values might one approach
  this issue?
• What kinds of arguments would be made by someone
  approaching the issue from a different set of
  values?
• Origins of facts alluded to in the argument
• Where do the arguments come from?
• Are the factual claims supported by competent
  research or by reliable sources?

18
Clues for finding omitted information

• Details of procedures used for gathering facts
• How many people completed the questionnaire?
• How were the survey questions worded?
• Alternative techniques for gathering or
  organizing evidence How might the results
  from an interview study differ from
  questionnaire results?