Do Americans spend $18K/year on non-essentials?

This is a fine example of using misleading statistics to try and make an argument.

USA Today tweeted out this graphic, related to some data that was collected by some firm.

There appear to be a number of method issues with this data, so a number of ways to use this in your class:

1) False Dichotomy: Survey response options should be mutually exclusive. I think there are two types of muddled dichotomies with this data:

a) What is "essential"?

When my kids were younger, I had an online subscription for diapers. Those were absolutely essential and I received a discount on my order since it was a subscription. However, according to this survey dichotomy, are they an indulgence since they were a subscription that originated online.

b) Many purchases fall into multiple categories.

Did the survey creators "double-dip" as to pad each mean and push the data towards it's $18K conclusion?

Were participants clear that "drinks out with friends" and "eating out at restaurants" were two discreet categories? What category applies if I impulsively buy a curling iron (for personal grooming) online?

2) Data from an established, well-known news source is not perfect data.

This data went viral. Lots of people were exposed to this data, as it was linked by local news channels and local newspapers. But that doesn't make it perfect data.

3) The data assumes that all Americans use all of the products in all of these categories.

Plenty of people don't belong to a gym or use ride-sharing services, but these expenses still count towards the total for all Americans.

4) Conflict of interest.

The original data was collected in order to make an argument in favor of buying life insurance. Specifically, they were arguing that individuals could afford life insurance if they better budgeted, which is true for some people. However, it is problematic to frame certain expenses as an option when they are not.

5) If a person didn't use one of these services, where their "zeroes" counted towards the mean?

Comments

Ways to use funny meme scales in your stats classes

Have you ever heard of the theory that there are multiple people worldwide thinking about the same novel thing at the same time? It is the multiple discovery hypothesis of invention . Like, multiple great minds around the world were working on calculus at the same time. Well, I think a bunch of super-duper psychology professors were all thinking about scale memes and pedagogy at the same time. Clearly, this is just as impressive as calculus. Who were some of these great minds? 1) Dr. Molly Metz maintains a curated list of hilarious "How you doing?" scales. 2) Dr. Esther Lindenström posted about using these scales as student check-ins. 3) I was working on a blog post about using such scales to teach the basics of variables. So, I decided to create a post about three ways to use these scales in your stats classes: 1) Teaching the basics of variables. 2) Nominal vs. ordinal scales. 3) Daily check-in with your students. 1. Teach your students the basics...

Using pulse rates to determine the scariest of scary movies

The Science of Scare project, conducted by MoneySuperMarket.com, recorded heart rates in participants watching fifty horror movies to determine the scariest of scary movies. Below is a screenshot of the original variables and data for 12 of the 50 movies provided by MoneySuperMarket.com: https://www.moneysupermarket.com/broadband/features/science-of-scare/ https://www.moneysupermarket.com/broadband/features/science-of-scare/ Here is my version of the data in Excel format . It includes the original data plus four additional columns (so you can run more analyses on the data): -Year of Release -Rotten Tomato rating -Does this movie have a sequel (yes or no)? -Is this movie a sequel (yes or no)? Here are some ways you could use this in class: 1. Correlation : Rotten Tomato rating does not correlate with the overall scare score ( r = 0.13, p = 0.36). 2. Within-subject research design : Baseline, average, and maximum heart rates are reported for each film. 3. ...

Andy Field's Statistics Hell

Andy Field is a psychologist, statistician, and author. He created a funny, Dante's Inferno-themed web site that contains everything you ever wanted to know about statistics. I know, I know, you're thinking, "Not another Dante's Inferno themed statistics web site!". But give this one a try. Property of Andy Field. I certainly can't take credit for this. Some highlights: 1) The aesthetic is priceless. For example, his intermediate statistics page begins with the introduction, "You will experience the bowel-evacuating effect of multiple regression, the bone-splintering power of ANOVA and the nose-hair pulling torment of factor analysis. Can you cope: I think not, mortal filth. Be warned, your brain will be placed in a jar of cerebral fluid and I will toy with it at my leisure." 2) It is all free. Including worksheets, data, etc. How amazing and generous. And, if you are feeling generous and feel the need to compensate him for the website, ...

Search This Blog