How to deceive us by using statistics

July 5, "Levada-Center" published a study that 91% of Russians negative attitude towards people strolling in bathing suits. Among the opponents of the bikini and swimming trunks dominated the respondents aged 40 to 54 years. Despite this, some of the media to present information from a different angle, telling that all Russians are to walk in a negligee negative. We decided to find out to what tricks you can resort to the statistics, the information seemed more attractive.

What for interview about sunbathing topless exclusively of people aged 40 to 54 years? Perhaps we should go ahead and interview the age group older than 80 about whether we need the internet? Submitting the same information in different ways, you can dramatically change the way it sees the rest. Here are a few examples of how to cheat by using statistics.

Using the metrics that are good only at first glance

Example: 90% of all sold in the last 20 years, cars are still on the roads.

It seems that this is a very good brand, once the machine is so durable. But think better. Perhaps this car brand was launched 10 years ago? Then it does not seem so attractive.

More correct and less yellow a header should read as follows: "90% of all vehicles older than 20 years are still on the roads."

Statement on the effectiveness without comparison with alternatives

Example: it is possible to effectively relieve pain reliever for headaches.

It makes no sense to talk about the effectiveness of the product, without comparing it with others. "Make the best", "better than others", "best quality" - these words should make you think about whether to buy this product. If you want to prove that your better analgesic, it is necessary to compare it with other brands. Otherwise it is useless words.

Playing with charts and diagrams

Example:

At this conference, Steve Jobs talked about the iPhone share of all smartphones in the United States. Despite the fact that the iPhone used 19.5% of its share in the diagram looks bigger than the share of "other" (21.2%). Visually, this can be achieved by giving the diagram 3D-effect.

Submission of information without confirmation

Example: after the legalization of marijuana smokers the number of residents of the Netherlands increased.

These "facts" are worth nothing without evidence. Perhaps a website where you read it, simply forgot to put a link to the study, but in any case believe that information has no meaning.

The point is not the zero reference point on the graph

Example:

The photo shows that the number of participants Obamacare program increased by 1.066 million people. That is a difference of about 17%. The chart is the difference between the columns almost three-times. This is due to the fact that is not zero is taken as a reference point.

Statistics provided by the interested party

Example: we tested our new shampoo and came to the conclusion that it is more effective than all the analogues on the market.

And finally, a rather obvious fact. If the research carried out stakeholder, the results need to believe it with extreme caution.