It's time to start a new discussion! (If you need instructions about how to blog or the expectations, please scroll down to Blogging Instructions - PLEASE READ and click on the link.)
Topic for the blog this week: Can numbers/statistics ever be considered totally factual and objectively true... or are they always subject to human influence and interpretation? Provide an example to support your claims.
Be sure to type a 1-2 paragraph on this topic by Sunday night and respond to a few others' posts as well by Tuesday's class. Click on the words Week Two above to get started!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would say that statistics are usually human influenced and interpretation. I mean statistics do help out but there are so many unknown factors involving them. Like discussed the first day of class when on the basketball statistics. People try to tell who the best players are based on a set number of points each player gets, but as stated as errors, we do not know which player had more playing time if it doesn't specifically say after a certain amount of playing time for the players that are being compared. if two are being prepared and one gets 2 minutes before half time and the other gets 5 in overtime and the second makes 2 times the amount of points the first person did how can we say one is better than the other? Statistics aren't specific enough for me in most cases. There are too many holes and glitches in the system or situation at hand. People decide what the statistic will be based upon and sometimes like we've seen with the Sally Clark case, it creates unnecessary controversy and can harm people in the long run due to misinterpretation humans make.
ReplyDeletei believe that statistics are very much influenced by humans because we are what make the numbers. especially when it comes to what works better, humans can respond to what there likes and dislikes are. yes, statistics can be considered factical in some cases but all in all no because there are to many what if's and unknown facts.
ReplyDeleteI believe statistics are always subject to human influence and interpretation because sometimes individuals manipulate or misinterpret information to justify a result. For example, the Sally Clark case. Also, we can view same statistic and interpret it a different way. For example, when viewing the graph on the election results some of the students interpreted the graph based on how many voted in total instead of the number of people who were polled.
ReplyDeleteStats all depend upon the person and how its interpreted which is basically human influence. Everyone has there own option and its always going to differ. In some cases stats are proven to be true and in others its done by survey which leads to opinion. Even with that being done it would then vary with age group and sex.
ReplyDeleteI believe stats will always be subjected to human influence and interpretation, and therefore will never be 100% true. As humans we often manipulate people into believing what we want them to believe. Like in Sir roy Meadow and Sally Clark case, Roy wanted people to believe that Sally was guilty of murdering her sons, and as a result of false statistics, she was incarcerated on false charges.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I feel numbers/statistics cannot be considered totally factual and objectively true and they are always subject to human influence and interpretation because, statistics are products of someone’s opinion and compromises. People decide to take something and based on a little research count for example: Is it more likely for African American students to graduate from HBCU'S with a 3.0 or above or White students to graduate from a non-HBCU with a 3.0 or above, and support their findings with some numbers to make their stats seem believable. Most statistic figures come from objective and or indisputable evidence, thus not factual depending on matters of different groups as well.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though the numbers themselves can be very factual, and objective. Hypothetically, for example, one can honestly say that there are 45,000 Black males in prison versus 50,000 Black males in college. In this instancem the numbers are ery true, they are not biased or subjective in any way... Where the situation turns biased or subjective is when humans begin interpreting the numbers. If people start discounting the number of those in currently in prison who had been/ are enrolled in college then they manipulate the numbers to ocnvey the message they want. In the case of Sir Roy Meadows and Sally Clark, his odds of 73,000,000 : 1 were not true numbers at all. He (the human being) manipulated the numbers of possible crib deaths based on factors that had never been proven to cause crib death. for example he focused on well off, non smoking households when it has never been proven that crib deaths dont happen in those families. So, I dont think the numbers lie, people lie.
ReplyDeleteHave you ever heard the saying "WOMEN AND MEN LIE NUMBERS DONT" (JAY-Z) I am a strong believer in this quote not only because my favorite rapper said it but you can apply it to alot of things, for ex: if the NFL football team washington redskins fans say they are the best team in the league they are entitled to there opinion but if the numbers say something like they have only won 40 percent of there games in the last 2 regular seasons that is not proof of a great team because there is 15 games in a regular season so 2 season would be 30 so 40 percent of that is like 7.5%. So when your not talking about numbers anything can be said but when support is showed thats what matters!
ReplyDeleteIM OUT!!!
I think statistics will never be factually true. The only reason people present stats is to prove their case (whatever it is) to be true. There will always be someone presenting information one way and then a colleague interpret the information another way. For example, when we did that exercise about receiving funding for our youth programs. If I really wanted funding, I could manipulate my stats to show that my program is the only program in the world that positively works for kids.
ReplyDeleteLauren,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you 100%. What you said just strengthens my beleif on why statistics will never be 100% factual. When people want something their way, nothing is going to stop them from getting that and stats is just a tool they use to get it faster.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that it could go both ways. I say this because it depends on what the statistics is about. Now if statistics was showing the number of white people living in America vs. black people living in America then the numbers stated could very well be factual and true. It too could be very well supported with evidence from the classification of race stated on every birth certificate in America.
ReplyDeleteNow if statistics is stating that there are more educated white Americans with higher paying jobs than black Americans then that could be subject to human influence and interpretation. Due to the history of America whites were given a far better opportunity to succeed in life, which was to get an education and have the highest paid job and blacks were not. Due to the unfairness on black Americans that number will always be wrong. Yes there are more white Americans with higher degrees and better paying jobs than black Americans, but does that make them smarter than the black Americans? No! I don’t think so, there are allot of educated African Americans which means that they had some type of school education who just didn’t have the same opportunity as the white American in their time to get a higher education and a better paying job. They were denied that right. So just because they don’t have a degree and a high paying job they will never be considered as educated people.
I think if the playing field was equal you would have just as many black Americans with an education and good paying jobs than you would white Americans.
DuRReL
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. Everyone’s opinion will always differ. And if a statistics is done through a survey then whichever option has the most likes and dislikes then statistics will show that one is better than the other. I really can’t say what will make statistics 100% true. Sure is a mystery to me.....
Tonya
ReplyDeleteI agree with you some people do manipulate or misinterpret information to justify a result. I think that statistics should be supported by facts only not opinions. But how do we know what is a fact or an opinion when some statements are considered facts due to their research of opinion? Confusing to me...
Agotay I feel what your saying, when it comes to colleges and grade scores it all will vary with how things were taught and if the school was considered an easy school. A white school could have been taught a bit tougher than a HBCU...even with that it would be based on opinion. Stats usually comes from opinion or how the person interprets whats at hand.
ReplyDeleteI think that statistics are always factual, but the they are left up human's interpretation. In fact, the person "counting the numbers" could manipulate the formating of a question to make the statistical fact support that individuals personal opinion. For example, the discussion we covered in class about "there are more black men in jail than in college" is true, but it is also true that there are more black men of college age in college than in jail. It is all about interpretation, having all the information and asking the right questions. to answer the blog question, I think that the statistic is always fact but they are definately left to the manipulation of human influence.
ReplyDeletestats can be factual as well as objectively true.. they can be factual on the basis of who asking what question correctly. not asking the right questions can make stats objectively true just off of the opinion of the individual(e.g. Sally Clark situation). also basing it on the group you ask and the diversity within that group of people!
ReplyDeleteStatistics are always open to human interpretation. After all statistics is “Telling a story!” lol Also questions can be asked in such a way that gives the interviewee total control of its out come. For example in SGA we did a survey asking the students if they would like to see changes made in the areas of technology. But we asked questions that would prove our point/ get the outcome that we needed.
ReplyDeleteQuestions:
Would you like to have more computers in the labs?
Do you think there are enough computers at Shaw Univ. for its students?
Would you like to see Shaw advance its use of technology?
Outcome:
68% of Shaw students feel they need more computers
75% of Shaw students don’t think there are enough computers
81% of Shaw students feel Shaw needs to advance its technology
When worded this way it will be easier to get things done because so many people see this as an issue. Further more we have a complete survey of Shaw students
I think its more human influence than any thing. For example in basketball a person free throw percentage is acounted through a mean Which is average sayina a person with an 62% avg cant hit two game winnning shots. Its more a probality he/she might not hit the shots. SO the question I RAISED IS WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEEN PROBABLITY AND STATISTICS.
ReplyDeleteOk DG where do these questions come from?? i had to look up the word "objective" to try and answer this question.One of the definitions says" determined by the realities of the thing dealt with rather than the thoughts of writer or speaker, w/o bias or prejudgment" so no i don't think it will be considered "totally" factual, because of the human influence and interpretation. The numbers stay the same but the facts change due to humans. I am going to take a stab at an example:taking a survey : the number of people being surveyed is true, but the answers they may or may not give influence the survey because of the interpretation,understanding,or thought process,and if they are answering "objectively" and honestly. So the outcome may not be determined because of the answer not the #. i know there is no right or wrong to you DG, but honestly....does that make since?
ReplyDeleteJanuary 25, 2009 10:09 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOK, this is something like a tricky question but I'll try to answer it the best way I can. As long as it makes sense....lol.......... Numbers/Statistics is very human influence, but what sometimes gets me is that you can't really determine an unknown factor if there isn't proof of evidence visible to assume what it may be. So in a way, it might not be objectively true because there are really two sides to the situation, you have the side that know what it is or think they know what it is but is not able to determine what it is....and then you have the other group that dont know what it is and trying to find out what it may be, but still have to come up with a solution to why it might be what they think it is. Ex of my own: If there was a 10ft tall building with more than 15,000 people in it, you can possibly see that the numbers are objectively and hypothetically true. But where is the proof saying that it is 15,000 people there? So as far as numbers being factual and objectively true, I have to say that it depends but not as sure as "True".....Thankyou and have a nice life
ReplyDeleteI believe statistics are always undergoing change. To me, statistics are made at a certain in a certain year. For example say that Shaw University calculated stats for students who graduate on time, meaning in for years. One year it might be 50% and the next year it might be 75% catch my drift? Again I say, statistics are a ongoing changing matter.
ReplyDeleteI believe that stats.are so much human influenced but have alot of confusion with them also.I think that it involves around everyday life. People makes numbers so hard.for an example the case of sir Roy,he used the statics method and he was wrong,but not wrong.
ReplyDeleteI completely disagree with you David. Statistics are not always factual because humans fave the right to change or misuse statistics. Statistics can be manipulative because if someone asks a question by way of a survey, the question can be misunderstood because of the wording for one thing. People may need clarification and people that usually don't wanna give the whole truth or story they use the word "basically." So basically that can be a manipulative choice of words. People have the power to dictate what information is presented to others. A fraction of the numbers and stats at hand could be very false or biased. I just personally have a whole new perception of statistics.
ReplyDeleteShawntia
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you when you said Numbers/Statistics is human influence and there isn't enough proof of evidence visible to assume what it may be. This is why we must use more critcal thinking when viewing statistics.
shawntia
ReplyDeletei think so to numbers make up what statistics are and without humans being involved there would be really no use.There should be more was to see if stat's are what they say they are.
I would have to say, statistics are majority based on human influence and interpertation. As we all know, numbers sometimes lie. The numbers are based on the action of people but do we know how long this individual has been on this task, sport, team, etc..For example, time on a job verses someone who just started can be the difference of why the stats are higher than others. For stats, you should include all factors.
ReplyDeleteShawntia,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you also. There isnt enough evidence to determine stats in some cases, especially sports.
Jess,
ReplyDeleteI truly agree with you. Statistics can be manipulative and biased. Sometimes when you are asked a question, it's either open-minded or open-ended. You may not always have a chance to be open-minded. And some stats are based on your answers. It all depends on the topic you are discussing.
I agree with jess when she said… Statistics are not always factual because humans fave the right to change or misuse statistics. I believe it’s true to because if you look at all the facts it’s basically true.
ReplyDeleteNumbers and statistics can be considered factually true the majority of the time in my sight. For the most part they represent an concrete set of information that primarily reflects the data that was collected. On the other side of the table I also can think of many reasons how and why it can be inaccurate. One thing that I have learned in class is that even if the factual data is correct; the reader of the data has to be able to comprehend the information or else the information may come off wrong. So in conclusion I can see it as factual but with occasional human error.
ReplyDelete