Statistics do not lie. Statistical tests are just that, tests aimed at interpreting patterns and trends. They are mathematical applications to information. Statistical outcomes are not sentient, they do not have opinions.
Statistical tests are only as good as the questions they are designed with, and the sample size of the data collected. A statistical test laced with biased questions with net a biased outcome. Likewise, too small of a sample will net an inclusive or insufficiently supportable outcome.
Is the researcher doesn't understand the nature of the statistical test they have selected to apply to their research (all too often the event in political topics) they arrive at an erroneous result.
Likewise, if the interpretor doesnt understand what the statical test is designed to test, their interpretations become misleading and incorrect at best, fanciful at worst. The best statistical test are designed with neutrally asked questions, those that willfully are designed to minimize bias of any kind.
Sounds like a plea in support of Eugenics. Its originator, Francis Dalton, also laid the foundations for what became statistics.
Hmmm, interesting observation. I would for all practical purposes be the last person to support eugenics. Again, statistics are only as good as the questions asked. Biased questions yield biased outcomes.
When I teach my students how to generate a hypothesis, I use an IF >THEN>WHEN structure. The IF statement sets up the original condition (Control variable). The THEN statement introduces the variable to be changed (Independent variable), and the WHEN statement re-states the variable change, then makes the prediction (actual hypothesis) and represents the Dependent variable.
@t1nick In my coding days, <when> statement meant every time a global variable changed, it was to be retested against a condition, and if positive a new action selected.
It was very useful in reducing the size of coding, whilst speeding up the reaction. For example, in a space invaders game.
WHEN Missile=Enemy : Explode.
Ooh, I could go to town with this one ...
Your point? A statistical test is only as good as the questions asked. A good statistical analysis should be worded as unbiased and as neutral as possible, yet aimed as accurately as possible towards the target isdue.
@t1nick My point was humour. I threw together a list of heavily biased questions.
Ahhhh! Lol.
Statistics could be manipulated by a toddler to get whatever outcome you wish...notoriously so!
No statistics cannot. Interpretation by unscrupulous people and uninformed, gullible consumers can be. Statistics cannot. If your statistics are manipulated, then ther outcome is worthless. Statistics say what statistics are designed to say, nothing more, nothing less. A poor test says more about the designer than it does about the test.
@t1nick Agreed. My own observation is that some statistics are foisted on an unsuspecting public by people who should know better. My favourite is "Trans-Monaco Airlines has never had a flying accident [but we don't have any planes!].".
You illustrate an interesting point. What responsibility do average American citizens, or the citizens of any First World country, have to educate themselves in assessing credibility of any source. What this last 5 years surrounding our Trump experience has illuminated is that, at least in the US, is that our citizenry has become intellectually lazy (not really new news).
But have taken this intellectual laziness beyond what would be expectef of a nation of our resources and education access. The eagerness to suspend reasonable certainty and facts for unreasonable conspiracies and unsubstantiated claims. It befuddled the mind that we have slid so far down this rabbit hole.