Re:Think Like a Statistician – Without the Math
by danso on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @06:13AM
(#10743526)
> This should go without saying, but approach data as objectively as possible. I'm not saying you shouldn't have a hunch about what you're looking for, but don't let your preconceived ideas influence the results. Because if you go to length looking for some specific pattern, you're probably going to find it. It'll just be at the sacrifice of accurate results.
I couldn't say it better myself. I admit to loathing when people think that they can finally prove whatever thing they've been long advocating for, now that they have the data that proves it. Besides the huge issue of thinking that data -- by nature of being data, or something -- inherently contains more truth than just someone literally rambling into a spreadsheet...if the dataset is indeed worthwhile, and by that, I mean deep...then whatever foundational beliefs you think were true needs to be re-evaluated in light of examining the data before moving on to prove something.
This is something that I'm reminded of when sampling the public Twitter stream...I use Twitter probably more than I do email, but my perception of what the Twitter community is like -- I.e. Who and from where people participate, the kind of things they tweet about, etc -- are inextricably narrowed by how I've self-selected users to follow. So when just looking at a random sample of everything that is currently being tweeted, it practically feels like I've stepped onto an alternate reality.
I couldn't say it better myself. I admit to loathing when people think that they can finally prove whatever thing they've been long advocating for, now that they have the data that proves it. Besides the huge issue of thinking that data -- by nature of being data, or something -- inherently contains more truth than just someone literally rambling into a spreadsheet...if the dataset is indeed worthwhile, and by that, I mean deep...then whatever foundational beliefs you think were true needs to be re-evaluated in light of examining the data before moving on to prove something.
This is something that I'm reminded of when sampling the public Twitter stream...I use Twitter probably more than I do email, but my perception of what the Twitter community is like -- I.e. Who and from where people participate, the kind of things they tweet about, etc -- are inextricably narrowed by how I've self-selected users to follow. So when just looking at a random sample of everything that is currently being tweeted, it practically feels like I've stepped onto an alternate reality.