Talk:Misuse of statistics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The book _Lies, damn lies, and statistics_ is a good reading on misuse of statistics, as commonly used to promote politicians, policies, products, ideologies, and medical ideas regardless of their merit.
From Talk:Misuse Of Statistics:
The latest presidential election might provide some food for thought about the misuse of statistics.
What do you think of the exit polls number not matching the vote on voting machines? Is the wide discrepancy proving anything? Does those exit poll numbers amount to a good statistic misused, is it flawed, or is it good?
So many ways to misuse a statistic. So little time! (-;
[edit] bad example
" With a subject on which the general public has no personal knowledge of, you can fool a lot of people. For example you can say on TV "Most autistics are hopelessly incurable if raised without parents or normal education" and many people will only remember the first part of the claim, "Most autistics are hopelessly incurable". "
The suggestion that autism is curable is itself arguable. Whether hopelessly or otherwise - the behavioural symptoms can be addressed, but the underlying condition cannot be cured.
Unfortunately I can't think of a better alternative - but this is a wrong 'un.
[edit] Additional info???
I am wondering if there might be a box or section to devoted to specific procedures for DIAGNOSING/CURING misuses? Or does that belong as a whole different entry like: "Detecting Misuse of Statistics"?
[edit] Quality of the article and NPOV
Obviously there are unlimited examples of people with something to sell abusing statistics, but lets keep the examples here off of hot button issues, there's no benefit to it and people can debate contemporary topics under the appropriate topic headings. The Michael Fumento bit reads like an example of the very thing it's attempting to illustrate: selective reporting. And its citation is a dead link. --DKEdwards 21:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
