Joel ever. It was a bad stat
labeled “Every year since 1950, the number of American children gunned down has
doubled.” As the worst social statistic ever. It was a bad stat because it was
inaccurate. Some factors that make the
statistic less powerful are, where the stat came from, who counts the death and
how, what do they mean by “child”, and what does “killed by guns” mean. A good
solution for a bad stat would be to make sure it has a good source behind it.
researchers helped develop social statistics because they believed it could
help governments devise wise policies. They also were aware of scientific
developments. What the author means when her said “creating a social problem”
is that a social issue
is a problem that
influences a considerable number of the individuals within a society. Social issues are distinguished
from economic issues;
however, some issues have
both social and
economic aspects. There are also issues that
don’t fall into either category, such as warfare.
basic sources of bad stats are: guessing, defining, measuring, and sampling.
Guessing is when someone don’t really know the facts, or when someone is hoping
to draw attention, or maybe someone is being bias about a subject. In order for
it to be a good stat, it has to have some sort of definition to answer a
question, if it does not have that then it is a bad stat. In a good stat there
has to be a sample or example, if not then it is a bad stat.
mind-sets audiences have when it comes to stats are the naïve. That’s when they
believe they understand a bit about stats. Another one is the cynical, that’s
when someone is suspicious of stats. Also there is the critical, and that’s
when someone is cautious and they evaluate numbers to distinguish between and
good or bad stat. The author thinks the Critical is the best. My mind set
before reading this book was I didn’t really care. And after reading this book
I still don’t care.