Accurate facts that mislead

I’ve always been fascinated by accurate stats that can be misleading.

For example, Simpson’s Paradox explains why Reggie Miller was more accurate than Larry Bird in both three-point shots and two-point shots, but Bird was more accurate when you combine them.

Or you have the fact that Chick-Fil-A is mathematically the fastest drive-thru restaurant, but they’re also mathematically the slowest, and both stats are accurate (and from the same study).

Annie Duke recently shared a similar idea where people used data to show that we’re all getting dumber. Specifically that starting in 1935, Nobel winners by birth year have been steadily dropping. In this case, though, there isn’t a counter-stat to show the other side, but rather it’s just a misleading interpretation of the data. Here’s the chart:

However, Annie sums it up nicely:

Why is the interpretation that people are getting dumber so unfounded here? Because there is an obvious alternative explanation for this seeming disappearance of people of Nobel-Prize-level intelligence: How old are Nobel Prize winners?

Old.

It’s tricky in today’s world because so many of the stats you see (particularly on places like social media) are completely made up. Therefore, if you find data that is verifiably accurate, you feel like you need to reach the conclusion shared with the data.

Or maybe not.

It’s not always easy to find the truth within the truth, but it’s always worth the effort. I encourage you to check out Annie’s post for more.