Editing Misuse of statistics (section)

==Simple causes==
Many misuses of statistics occur because
* The source is a subject matter expert, not a statistics expert.{{sfn | Spirer | Spirer| Jaffe | 1998 |loc=chapters 7 & 8}}  The source may incorrectly use a method or interpret a result.
* The source is a statistician, not a subject matter expert.{{sfn | Spirer | Spirer| Jaffe | 1998 |loc=chapter 3}}  An expert should know when the numbers being compared describe different things.  Numbers change, as reality does not, when legal definitions or political boundaries change.
* The subject being studied is not well defined,{{sfn | Spirer | Spirer| Jaffe | 1998 |loc=chapter 4}} or some of its aspects are easy to quantify while others hard to quantify or there is no known quantification method (see [[McNamara fallacy]]). For example:
** While [[Intelligence quotient#Criticism and views|IQ tests]] are available and numeric, it is difficult to define what they measure, as intelligence is an elusive concept.
** Publishing "impact" has the same problem.<ref>{{cite journal
 | last = Adler | first = Robert |author2=John Ewing |author3=Peter Taylor
 | title = Citation statistics | journal = Statistical Science
 | volume = 24 | issue = 1 | pages = 1–14 | year = 2009 | doi = 10.1214/09-STS285| doi-access = free }}</ref> Scientific papers and scholarly journals are often rated by "impact", quantified as the number of citations by later publications. Mathematicians and statisticians conclude that impact (while relatively objective) is not a very meaningful measure. "The sole reliance on citation data provides at best an incomplete and often shallow understanding of {{nowrap|research{{tsp}}{{mdash}}}}{{tsp}}an under{{shy}}standing that is valid only when reinforced by other judgments. Numbers are not inherently superior to sound judgments."
** A seemingly simple question about the number of words in the English language immediately encounters questions about archaic forms, accounting for prefixes and suffixes, multiple definitions of a word, variant spellings, dialects, fanciful creations (like ectoplastistics from ectoplasm and statistics),{{sfn | Spirer | Spirer| Jaffe | 1998 |loc=chapter title}} technical vocabulary, and so on.
* Data quality is poor.{{sfn | Spirer | Spirer| Jaffe | 1998 |loc=chapter 5}} Apparel provides an example.  People have a wide range of sizes and body shapes. It is obvious that apparel sizing must be multidimensional. Instead it is complex in unexpected ways. Some [[Clothing sizes#Women|apparel]] is sold by size only (with no explicit consideration of body shape), sizes vary by country and manufacturer and [[Vanity sizing|some sizes]] are deliberately misleading. While sizes are numeric, only the crudest of statistical analyses is possible using the size numbers with care.
* The popular press has limited expertise and mixed motives.<ref>{{Citation|last=Weatherburn |first=Don |title=Uses and abuses of crime statistics |journal=Crime and Justice Bulletin: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice |publisher=NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research |issn=1030-1046 |volume=153 |isbn=9781921824357 |date=November 2011 |url=http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/bocsar/documents/pdf/cjb153.pdf |url-status=unfit |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140621205347/http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/bocsar/documents/pdf/cjb153.pdf |archive-date=June 21, 2014 }} This Australian report on crime statistics provides numerous examples of interpreting and misinterpreting the data. "The increase in media access to information about crime has not been matched by an increase in the quality of media reporting on crime. The misuse of crime statistics by the media has impeded rational debate about law and order." Among the alleged media abuses: selective use of data, selective reporting of facts, misleading commentary, misrepresentation of facts and misleading headlines.  Police and politicians also abused the statistics.</ref> If the facts are not "newsworthy" (which may require exaggeration) they may not be published. The motives of advertisers are even more mixed.
* "Politicians use statistics in the same way that a drunk uses lamp posts—for support rather than illumination" – Andrew Lang (WikiQuote)  "What do we learn from these two ways of looking at the same numbers?  We learn that a clever propagandist, right or left, can almost always find a way to present the data on economic growth that seems to support her case.  And we therefore also learn to take any statistical analysis from a strongly political source with handfuls of salt."<ref>{{cite book | last = Krugman | first = Paul | title = Peddling prosperity: economic sense and nonsense in the age of diminished expectations | publisher = W.W. Norton | location = New York | year = 1994 | isbn = 0-393-03602-2 | page = [https://archive.org/details/peddlingprosperi00krug/page/111 111] | url-access = registration | url = https://archive.org/details/peddlingprosperi00krug/page/111 }}</ref> The term statistics originates from numbers generated for and utilized by the state.  Good government may require accurate numbers, but popular government may require supportive numbers (not necessarily the same).  "The use and misuse of statistics by governments is an ancient art."{{sfn | Spirer | Spirer| Jaffe | 1998 }}