Something Missing In The Stats

Written by a human, for humans, always.

---

I hear a lot of people talk about scientific research...

I read a lot of scientific research.

There is one thing that you will often find when looking at research...

Conflicting information.

You might find one study that says something is good for you...

Then another that says it is bad for you.

One study shows statistically significant results...

Another shows results equal to a placebo.

How can this be, though?

How can multiple studies end up showing different results?

There are a few factors that can be at play.

For instance...

Researchers may have failed to account for different factors that influence the results.

For instance...

You might find two research studies that look at what happens when you eat red meat...

One study shows it is bad, and the other shows it is good.

But did the research account for the quality of red meat?

See...

The mixed results could have been caused by whether the red meat came from a regenerative farm or from a factory farm.

The regenerative farm would lead to good outcomes...

But the factory farm could be contaminated with poor-quality grains, added hormones, and pesticides...

Among other problems.

Were the results from the factory farm the red meat itself, or one of the many other potential factors?

You will find in many research studies that something may be "claimed" as the result...

While simultaneously ignoring other potential explanations.

This can explain how one study will show one thing while a different study shows another.

You can also look at the length of time in the research.

A study that only goes for a week can be easily manipulated...

But a long study usually has more confounding factors that are harder to keep track of.

Both can create problems when it comes to research.

Many people will take a stance on preferring one type of research over another...

But if you want to get an accurate picture, you have to realize that all types of research have strengths and weaknesses.

There may be some preferences and ways to tease out the information...

But do not automatically trust or distrust research just because of the format.

Even meta-analyses can be skewed based on whether the researchers actually look through as much research as they can find...

Or if they decide on using certain criteria that qualifies only certain studies.

There is another common way that you can see where different research studies get different results...

Based on the way they use data.

See...

You can use statistics in a way...

To tell different stories...

Using the same numbers.

One of my favorite examples is this...

If I were to tell you that there was a new product that was 50% better than the next best competitor...

You would think that sounds amazing.

But if I told you the next best competitor had a 2% success rate and the new product had a 3% success rate...

You would think both sound terrible.

But the numbers are all the same.

3% is 50% better than 2%.

But depending on which numbers you present will determine the story that people take away.

In all of these ways...

What you will discover is that there is always something missing in the stats.

Whether it is the details of what the researchers did...

Or what the amount of time studied reveals or fails to reveal...

Or what the numbers look at or fail to look at.

Part of learning to read research...

Is not just understanding what the research presents...

But paying close attention to what the research fails to present...

For better or for worse.

---

Are You Ready to Go Beyond Leadership?

Tired of Broken Algorithms and AI Slop?

Excited to Dive Deeper into Psychophysiological Mastery?

Want to Change The World?

The Seeking Sageship Newsletter is for You!

Click Here to Subscribe for Free!