Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Darrell Huff'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • THE BOARD ROOM
    • Welcome to BGO!
    • Board Business
    • Site News & Support
  • GENERAL FICTION
    • Central Library
    • 21st-Century Fiction
    • 20th-Century Fiction
    • Pre-1900 Fiction
    • Poetry and Drama
    • Writers' Corner
  • FICTION GENRES
    • Crime, Thrillers & Mystery
    • Fantasy & Myth
    • Historical & Romance
    • Horror
    • Science Fiction, Graphic Novels & Manga
  • NON-FICTION
    • Arts & Media
    • Biography & Autobiography
    • Food & Drink
    • History, Politics & Beliefs
    • Homelife & Lifestyle
    • Life, The Universe & Everything
    • Reference & Humour
    • Sport
    • Travel
  • CHILDREN & YOUNG ADULTS
    • Children & Young Adults - General Discussion
    • Read To
    • Read With
    • Read Alone
    • Read On
  • BGO GROUP READS
    • BGO Book Group Meeting Point
    • The Dead - James Joyce
    • Wuthering Heights - Emily Brontë
    • Me Talk Pretty One Day - David Sedaris
    • Things Snowball - Rich Hall
    • Food
    • Crossing to Safety - Wallace Stegner
    • Book Group Archive
  • ANYTHING BUT BOOKS
    • General Chat
    • Films, Television & Radio
    • Music & Culture
    • Language & Learning
    • Games, Quizzes & Links
  • SUBSCRIBERS' AREA
    • Subscribers' Offers
  • Sherlock Holmes

Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Current Book


Biography


Location


Interests


How did you hear about this site?

Found 1 result

  1. I wouldn't have bothered, but 67% of BGO posters wanted me to recover this thread. How to Lie With Statistics Darrell Huff's classic book on statistics was first published more than fifty years ago. In it he details how advertisers, politicians, newspapers, market researchers and the like manipulate numbers to give the answer they want. We all remember lines like: - Top breeders recommend it - Eight out of ten cats prefer Whiskas - More dentists use Colgate and this book explains what most of us knew already: how they are all lies. One example is called by Huff "The One Dimensional Picture." Before and After pictures are used to show the increase in something. In this picture different sized money bags are used to illustrate that American workers earn twice as much as their Russian counterparts: This is done by doubling the height of the money bag. That's fair isn't it? Of course not. The width is doubled as well, showing a four-fold increase in area and thus a four-fold increase in the American wage. And bags are of course three dimensional, so the American's bag can hold eight times as many coins as the poor Russian's. All from a simple doubling. But that was fifty years ago. Surely nobody would try such a ruse these days, would they? Check out the Greenmetropolis trees. There are many more such concepts in this slim, easily understood book. Another one still used today is the Repeated Small Sample (ask ten people to try your shampoo against a "leading rival" and if you don't get the result you want, ask another ten, and another ten until you do). It's not in the book but my favourite was a politician saying that crack cocaine usage had risen 167% from the previous year. I view any percentage higher than 100 with distrust bordering on contempt, and rightly so in this case. Crack cocaine usage had risen from 0.03% of the population to 0.08%, but she'd managed to turn that 0.05% increase into 167%. Quite impressive in a way, and arguably true in that 0.08 is one and two-thirds of 0.03. She got her headline, but the more people who see through such "lies" the better. I consider How to Lie... a classic book, and if the President Roosevelt and Mickey Mantle references are dated, the subject matter certainly isn't. I'd like to see taught in schools as a way to use statistics in real life. Hazel 25th July 2006 08:54 AM That sounds like a really interesting book. It drives me crazy when you see cosmetic/toiletry adverts on TV which say "84% of women who tried this saw an improvement" then at the bottom of the screen it says '243 women tested'. First of all, 243 is not a representative chunk of the the female audience, and to get such an odd number they clearly test the minimum number of women to get a high percentage (the target they set out to obtain). When one of these adverts says "33% of women...1 million tested" then I might be impressed with the product. Adrian 25th July 2006 10:01 AM Exactly Hazel. It's called a "statisically representative sample."I think the example he uses is a barrel full of Smarties and trying to find out how many of each colour there are. Reach in and grab a handful? In this case each colour was a layer in the barrel and so you'd get a wrong answer, but much worse never know it was wrong. It all sounds obvious but I bet there are millions who fall for it. In fact I know there, I asked ten of them megustaleer 25th July 2006 11:46 AM Aha! One of my pet peeves!! Hazel 25th July 2006 12:10 PM They should point out that it is 88% of a specifically targeted group of 243 women, who were given a £5 Marks & Spencer voucher to agree. Grammath 25th July 2006 01:13 PM It should be common knowledge that 42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot. Mark Twain summed it up best when he said that "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics." Cathy 28th July 2006 09:36 PM Sounds worth a read. There was a programme on ITV a while ago about how the government make it sound like they're putting more extra money into something by including money already pledged or interest rates and stuff like that. Haven't trusted statistics since then! Mungus 29th July 2006 10:34 AM Statistics are a tricksy way of generating sales. It's like medical statistics that can use 'number needed to treat', 'risk per 100,000', 'mortality after 5 years' and so on depending on which presents the required picture. No-one seems to care that the case of mumps has increased from 94 in 1996 to 43,322 in 2005 but are fixated on this inaccurate belief that the MMR jab can cause autism just because a dodgy study by a dodgy doctor got so much press. Not that I have a bee in my bonnet about it. Momo 30th July 2006 09:45 PM This book sounds really interesting. I have put it on my wishlist!
×