Group items tagged

Nice set of short videos on some fallacies from PBS. Moving the Goal Posts Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios by PBS Idea Channel 2:05 The Fallacy Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios by PBS Idea Channel 2:13 The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios by PBS Idea Channel 2:40 The Strawman Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios by PBS Idea Channel 2:12 The Ad Hominem Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios by PBS Idea Channel 2:23 The Black and White Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios by PBS Idea Channel 2:05 The Authority Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios by PBS Idea Channel 2:02 The "No True Scotsman" Fallacy | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios by PBS Idea Channel 2:22 3 Fallacies For Election Season! by PBS Idea Channel 11:50

Why probability and understanding statistical fallacies matters Some of our most important decisions are shaped by something as random as the order in which we make them. The gambler's fallacy, as it's known, affects loan officers, federal judges -- and probably you too. How to avoid it? The first step is to admit just how fallible we all are.

"Fenofibrate may reduce heart disease risk in some patients with type 2 diabetes" The release goes on to suggest that among patients with type 2 diabetes who also had high levels of triglycerides and low levels of "good" cholesterol, the drug lowered the risk of cardiovascular events compared with placebo. Sounds like it might be time to ask your doctor about the benefits of fenofibrate, right? Before you schedule that appointment, you might want to consider this detail that wan't included in the news release: The findings of benefit came from a small group of patients within a larger study whose results had previously been reported. And that larger study, known as ACCORD, found no overall cardiovascular benefit among patients treated with fenofibrate.

The importance of understanding #fallacies for helping to understand why people deny scientific explanations.

According to inoculation theory, facts are important but by themselves aren't sufficient to convince people as long as misinformation is also present. People also have to be inoculated against the misinformation, for example through an explanation of the logical fallacy underpinning the myth.

By UTS' Stephen Woodcock. Statistics is a useful tool for understanding the patterns in the world around us. But our intuition often lets us down when it comes to interpreting those patterns. In this series we look at some of the common mistakes we make and how to avoid them when thinking about statistics, probability and risk.

In what feels like an increasingly polarised world, trying to convince the "other side" to see things differently often feels futile. Psychology has done a great job outlining some of the reasons why, including showing that, regardless of political leanings, most people are highly motivated to protect their existing views."Our results show why debates about controversial issues often seem so futile," the researchers said. "Our values can blind us to acknowledging the same logic in our opponent's arguments if the values underlying these arguments offend our own."

What is the basis for the argument that poor Americans will be healthier if they are required to pay substantially more for health care? It appears that proponents like Ms. Verma have looked at research and concluded that having Medicaid is often no better than being uninsured - and thus that any private insurance, even with enormous deductibles, must be better. But our examination of research in this field suggests this kind of thinking is based on a classic misunderstanding: confusing correlation for causation.

The argument is simple, and goes a bit like this. Science does not work by appeal to authority, but rather by the acquisition of experimentally verifiable evidence. Appeals to scientific bodies are appeals to authority, so should be rejected. ...If legitimate authorities are not to be consulted, presumably there is no point in having scientists around at all, as each person would need to verify any claim on their own terms and with their own resources. That would mean a speedy decline into very dark times indeed.

An excellent resource that links to the 'debunking handbook' - outlining ways to combat misinformation and misconceptions.

Climate deniers have been peddling the myth 'no warming since [insert date]' for over a decade. It's a popular myth among those who benefit from maintaining the status quo because if the problem doesn't exist, obviously there's no need for action to solve it. And it's an incredibly easy argument that can be made at any time, using the telltale technique of climate denial known as cherry picking.

Everyone loves a good conspiracy theory. After all, who doesn't sometimes feel like the world we know is secretly being run by a race of human-reptile hybrids? Most of us don't take this kind of thing seriously.Most of us think we'd never fall for a conspiracy theory, but as it turns out, there just might be a little guy wearing a tinfoil hat inside all of us.

hen the AP United States history students at Aragon High School in San Mateo California, scanned the professionally designed pages of www.minimumwage.com, most concluded that it was a solid, unbiased source of facts and analysis. They noted the menu of research reports, graphics and videos, and the "About" page describing the site as a project of a "nonprofit research organization" called the Employment Policies Institute. But then their teacher, Will Colglazier, demonstrated how a couple more exploratory clicks-critically, beyond the site itself-revealed that the Employment Policies Institute is considered by the Center for Media and Democracy to be a front group created by lobbyists for the restaurant and hotel industries. "I have some bright students, and a lot of them felt chagrined that they weren't able to deduce this," said Colglazier, who videotaped the episode last January. "They got duped."

The quest for balance in a health news story can fail before the first sentence if the headline isn't appropriately calibrated. With that in mind, I looked at news stories and releases that we reviewed over the past month and compared the headline message with that of the study on which the news is based. About a third of news story headlines and a quarter of news release headlines either misstated the results or went beyond what the research could support.

Have you ever noticed that when you present people with facts that are contrary to their deepest held beliefs they always change their minds? Me neither. In fact, people seem to double down on their beliefs in the teeth of overwhelming evidence against them. The reason is related to the worldview perceived to be under threat by the conflicting data.

McDonald's Monopoly competition is back this month offering a chance to win expensive prizes, all for the price of a Big Mac. Given you could become tens of thousands of dollars richer by simply going on a Macca's run, McDonald's Monopoly games have in the past been subject to cheating and a multimillion-dollar scandal. But for those who prefer to play fair, what are your chances of actually snaring a prize?

A list of non-academic readings related to different aspects of the "fake news" debate, covering the impact of advertising, its role in the US election, the growing awareness of disinformation campaigns aimed at upcoming European elections, and some of the psychological theories that help explain why our brains can be so easily fooled.

Short (10 minute) podcast "How to question dubious statistics in just a few short steps."....it's got some very British humour (sorry), but pretty good!

Some advice on evaluating claims made on data Bergstrom believes that calling bullshit on data, big or otherwise, doesn't require a statistics degree-only common sense and a few habits of mind. "You don't have to understand all the gears inside a black box in order to evaluate what you're being told," he said. For those who were unable to enroll in INFO 198/BIOL 106B this spring, here is some of his and West's advice:

Excellent analysis from the FT (you'll need to login to view via the link) that uses knowledge of the Mean and Median to show that some companies have reported incorrect (fabricated?) pay-gap information! One in 20 UK companies that have submitted gender pay gap data to the government have reported numbers that are statistically improbable and therefore almost certainly inaccurate, a Financial Times analysis has found. Sixteen companies, each with more than 250 employees, reported that they paid their male and female staff exactly the same, that is they had a zero average gender pay gap measured by both the mean and median. Experts on pay said that it was highly anomalous for companies of that size to have median and mean pay gaps that were identical because the two statistics measure different things. The mean gap measures the difference between the average male and female salary while the median gap is calculated using the midpoint salary for each gender.