Statistical Science

How to Confuse with Statistics or: The Use and Misuse of Conditional Probabilities

Walter Krämer and Gerd Gigerenzer

Full-text: Open access

Abstract

This article shows by various examples how consumers of statistical information may be confused when this information is presented in terms of conditional probabilities. It also shows how this confusion helps others to lie with statistics, and it suggests both confusion and lies can be exposed by using alternative modes of conveying statistical information.

Article information

Source
Statist. Sci. Volume 20, Number 3 (2005), 223-230.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 24 August 2005

Permanent link to this document
https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1124891288

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1214/088342305000000296

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR2188919

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
1100.62531

Keywords
Conditional probabilities natural frequencies heuristical reasoning

Citation

Krämer, Walter; Gigerenzer, Gerd. How to Confuse with Statistics or: The Use and Misuse of Conditional Probabilities. Statist. Sci. 20 (2005), no. 3, 223--230. doi:10.1214/088342305000000296. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1124891288.


Export citation

References

  • Bar-Hillel, M. and Falk, R. (1982). Some teasers concerning conditional probabilities. Cognition 11 109--122.
  • Beck-Bornholdt, H.-P. and Dubben, H.-H. (1996). Is the Pope an alien? Nature 381 730.
  • Beck-Bornholdt, H.-P. and Dubben, H.-H. (1997). Der Hund, der Eier legt---Erkennen von Fehlinformationen durch Querdenken. Rowohlt, Hamburg.
  • Blyth, C. R. (1973). Simpson's paradox and mutually favorable events. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 68 746.
  • Borgida, E. and Brekke, N. (1981). The base rate fallacy in attribution and prediction. In New Directions in Attribution Research (J. H. Harvey, W. J. Ickes and R. F. Kidd, eds.) 3 63--95. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
  • Chung, K.-L. (1942). On mutually favorable events. Ann. Math. Statist. 13 338--349.
  • Cowdry, Q. (1990). Husbands or lovers kill half of women murder victims. The Times, April 14, p. 11.
  • d'Alembert, J. et al. (1779). Encyclopédie, ou dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers 10. J. L. Pellet, Geneva.
  • Edwards, A. W. F. (1996). Is the Pope an alien? Nature 382 202.
  • Feller, W. (1968). An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications 1, 3rd ed. Wiley, New York.
  • Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Adaptive Thinking---Rationality in the Real World. Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
  • Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Calculated Risks: How to Know When Numbers Deceive You. Simon and Schuster, New York. [British edition (2002). Reckoning with Risk. Penguin, London.]
  • Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Fast and frugal heuristics: The tools of bounded rationality. In Handbook of Judgement and Decision Making (D. Koehler and N. Harvey, eds.) 62--88. Blackwell, Oxford.
  • Gigerenzer, G. and Edwards, A. (2003). Simple tools for understanding risks: From innumeracy to insight. British Medical J. 327 741--744.
  • Good, I. J. (1996). When batterer becomes murderer. Nature 381 481.
  • Guilford, J. P. (1942). Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education. McGraw--Hill, New York.
  • Haller, H. and Kraus, S. (2002). Misinterpretations of significance: A problem students share with their teachers? Methods of Psychological Research 7 1--20.
  • Hoffrage, U., Lindsay, S., Hertwig, R. and Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Communicating statistical information. Science 290 2261--2262.
  • Kaigh, W. D. (1989). A category representation paradox. Amer. Statist. 43 92--97.
  • Krämer, W. (2002). Denkste---Trugschlüsse aus der Welt des Zufalls und der Zahlen, 3rd paperback ed. Piper, München.
  • Krämer, W. (2004). So lügt man mit Statistik, 5th paperback ed. Piper, München.
  • Leslie, J. (1992). The doomsday argument. Math. Intelligencer 14 48--51.
  • von Leibniz, G. W. (1887). Die philosophischen Schriften. (C. I. Gerhardt, ed.) 3. Weidmann, Berlin.
  • Miller, G. A. and Buckhout, R. (1973). Psychology: The Science of Mental Life, 2nd ed. Harper and Row, New York.
  • Nickerson, R. S. (2000). Null hypothesis significance testing: A review of an old and continuing controversy. Psychological Methods 5 241--301.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1975). Introduction to Statistics for Psychology and Education. McGraw--Hill, New York.
  • Schrage, G. (1993). Letter to the editor. Math. Intelligencer 15 3--4.
  • Schucany, W. R. (1989). Comment on ``A category representation paradox,'' by W. D. Kaigh. Amer. Statist. 43 94--95.
  • Schuchard-Fischer, C., Backhaus, K., Hummel, H., Lohrberg, W., Plinke, W. and Schreiner, W. (1982). Multivariate Analysemethoden---Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung, 2nd ed. Springer, Berlin.
  • Swoboda, H. (1971). Knaurs Buch der modernen Statistik. Droemer Knaur, München.
  • Wagner, C. H. (1982). Simpson's paradox in real life. Amer. Statist. 36 46--48.
  • Wyss, W. (1991). Marktforschung von A -- Z. Demoscope, Luzern.
  • Ziegler, H. (1974). Das Alibi des Schornsteinfegers---Unwahrscheinliche Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung in einem Mordprozeß. Rheinischer Merkur 39.