The Squawk Point

Organisational Mechanics

  • Home
  • Blog
    • People
    • Data
    • Process
    • Wild Cards
    • Index
  • Podcast
  • Book

Scientific Proof – Politicians are Stupid

17 November, 2013 by James Lawther 14 Comments

The power of belief

Have you ever wondered why people hold onto their beliefs despite statistical proof that they are wrong?

  • Is it that we don’t understand what the numbers are telling us?
  • Or is it that we just chose to ignore them?

Dan Kahan is the professor of Law and Politics at Yale University.  This question perplexed him.  So he ran an experiment with a thousand students, and this is what he found out…

Some of us aren’t very good at maths all of the time

In his first experiment the students were given data from a skin care cream trial and asked if the cream worked.  Not all the students could work out the answer.  Professor Kahan proved that maths is complicated.

Some of us aren’t very good at maths some of the time

The second experiment involved the same people and the same data but this time the subject was a gun control experiment (a highly charged political issue in the States).

Unsurprisingly the students who couldn’t figure out the skin care problem failed again.  But this time a large proportion of the people who had proved they could do the maths got it wrong as well.

Politics makes us stupid

  • The data was rigged so it was pro gun control
  • The data was rigged so it was anti gun control

Left or right, it didn’t matter, the drop in mathematical ability was the same.

Professor Kahan showed that if the data is counter to our political leanings then we are far more likely to jump to a conclusion that supports our view of the world and come up with the wrong answer.

We see what we want to see

Our businesses are rife with politics, bias and beliefs, it is part of the human condition.

So the next time your analysis suggest something contentious it is worth spending the time to make sure your presentation of the numbers is absolutely clear and unambiguous.

  • Both for those who can’t do the maths
  • And also those who can, but just might not like the answer

If you enjoyed this post click here for updates delivered to your inbox

Read another opinion

Image by the World Bank Photo Collection

Filed Under: Blog, Operations Analysis Tagged With: assumptions, beliefs, clarity, data is not information, human nature, statistics, video

About the Author

James Lawther
James Lawther

James Lawther is a middle-aged, middle manager.

To reach this highly elevated position he has worked in numerous industries, from supermarket retailing to tax collecting.  He has had several operational roles, including running the night shift in a frozen pea packing factory and carrying out operational research for a credit card company.

As you can see from his C.V. he has either a wealth of experience or is incapable of holding down a job.  If the latter is true this post isn’t worth a minute of your attention.

Unfortunately, the only way to find out is to read it and decide for yourself.

www.squawkpoint.com/

Comments

  1. Adrian Swinscoe says

    17 November, 2013 at 12:14 pm

    Hi James,
    Numeracy aside, does this not also prove that we have to fight to get through the cognitive dissonance that exists in much of what we do?

    Adrian

    Reply
    • James Lawther says

      17 November, 2013 at 7:19 pm

      Unfortunately I think it does.

      Which is unfortunate as it is a dreadfully difficult thing to do.

      Reply
  2. Annette Franz says

    18 November, 2013 at 6:04 am

    James,

    All you can do is present the facts (or data), right? Everyone will interpret it differently… or do with it what they will. And sometimes we just don’t like what the data tell us…

    I’m thinking about a recent experience with a client. The data told them something they didn’t want to hear. I didn’t make up what the analysis told us… it was right there in black and white. They chose to ignore it.

    Annette :-)

    Reply
  3. Mark Gilbert says

    18 November, 2013 at 7:11 am

    I listened to a BBC Radio 4 programme concerning this. Very similar to confirmation or optimism bias. But I tend to stay away from terms such as ‘Scientific Proof’ in favour of ‘Empirical Evidence’. Otherwise you end up with a crutch made of chocolate in hot weather. Another rendition of bias. We believe people have a tendency in a designed/controlled trial, etc. etc. etc…

    Reply
    • James Lawther says

      18 November, 2013 at 9:33 pm

      Very true Mark, I’m a guilty of sensationalism, unfortunately “Empirical Evidence that Politicians are Stupid” doesn’t have quite the same draw.

      James

      Reply
  4. maz iqbal says

    18 November, 2013 at 8:34 am

    Hello James,
    It occurs to me that perhaps you have really gotten the beauty of the being of human being. Allow me to share a story me that gets at the true wonder of human being.

    An experienced therapist is working with a client who is convinced that he (the client) is dead. After some sessions, the therapist has built enough rapport. Now the therapist feels ready to ‘present the numbers’ as it were – in a rather clear cut manner.

    The therapist, asks “Dave, do dead people bleed?”

    Dave responds, “Don’t be ridiculous! Dead people don’t bleed, only the living bleed.”

    Suddenly the therapist lunges out of chair, cuts Dave’s hand with a knife. And red blood starts to flow. Seeing the blood and seeing that Dave is seeing the blood, the therapist smiles. Why? He is convinced that he is shown Dave the indisputable data – the data that Dave needs to see that he is not dead.

    What does Dave say?

    Dave says “F**k me, dead people do bleed!”

    Enough said. I hope you enjoyed the story.

    Maz

    Reply
    • James Lawther says

      18 November, 2013 at 9:27 pm

      A beautiful story Maz, it made my day.

      Reply
  5. Zagmot says

    18 November, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    Nice work James,

    The same is true in corporations during business decision making, I see it frequently. Most of the time people make pre-favored decisions after viewing the data and they find ways to justify it.

    Which leaves me thinking, what is the root cause? Is it not having the ability to comprehend the data when it’s contradictory to personal belief, or is the data recognized and willfully ignored in favor of predisposed opinions?

    I will read your paper shortly, I’m very curious now.

    Reply
    • James Lawther says

      18 November, 2013 at 9:31 pm

      If I understand it properly it is a little more nuanced than that, we look at the data and then mange to convince ourselves that it is telling us what we want to here. We are very good at self delusion. Thanks for the comment

      Reply
  6. Chuck says

    18 November, 2013 at 8:25 pm

    Just goes to show as somebody smarter than me observed, “You just can’t fix stupid!”

    Reply
    • James Lawther says

      18 November, 2013 at 9:27 pm

      No Chuck, I don’t suppose you can.

      Thanks for the observation.

      Reply
  7. Tito Coronado says

    20 November, 2013 at 5:26 am

    The movie “The Challenger Disaster”(http://imdb.to/1bVCY1G) recounts the problem analysis associated with the loss of the Challenger Space Shuttle. It is a study in exactly the kinds of issues described here.

    If you are interested in gaining some insights it is a good watch, not a great plot and the conclusion is well documented, but there is much to learn from it.

    Enjoy,

    – Tito

    Reply
    • James Lawther says

      20 November, 2013 at 6:28 am

      Something to watch on Saturday night. I will have a look, thank you

      Reply
  8. Mark Spearman says

    9 December, 2013 at 1:22 am

    Usually statistics are very shallow and many times they are created with a goal of persuasion in mind. Your gun control example is a great one as both sides of the issue throw out incredibly swayed stats. For example, they say, “The number of people killed by their own gun is greater than crimes stopped with a gun.”. Ask one question, “How many people had accidents that also had gun safety education.”. Nobody knows because that would have swayed the persuasion that the statistician was shooting for. Then throw in that nobody knows how many crimes were actually stopped because, well, they were stopped and may have gone unreported.

    Now tell that stat to a farmer in the middle of nowhere who needs to protect his supplies from meth dealers. He’s shot weapons for 50 years with no incidents. Some would call him the ignorant one for ignoring their “facts”.

    I’ve seen presentations that are this ridiculous with other matters and it’s tiring to see the person presenting the “facts” become disgusted when he discounts the non-believers as the stupid ones.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Explore

accountability assumptions beliefs best practice blame bureaucracy capability clarity command and control communication complexity continuous improvement cost saving culture customer focus data is not information decisions employee performance measures empowerment error proofing fessing up gemba human nature incentives information technology innovation key performance indicators learning management style measurement motivation performance management poor service process control purpose reinforcing behaviour service design silo management systems thinking targets teamwork test and learn trust video waste

Receive Posts by e-Mail

Get the next post delivered straight to your inbox

Creative Commons

This information from The Squawk Point is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Creative Commons Licence
Customer Experience Update

Try This:

  • Fish Bone Diagrams – Helpful or Not?

  • Regression to The Mean

  • Brilliance Alone Won’t Take You Far

  • Should You Punish Mistakes?

Connect

  • E-mail
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • YouTube
  • Cookies
  • Contact Me

Copyright © 2025 · Enterprise Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in