Add Bookmark | Recommend this book | Back to the book page | My bookshelf | Mobile Reading

Free Web Novel,Novel online - All in oicq.net -> Romance -> The Legend of Coquettish Rebirth

Text Chapter 3722: Data lies?

Previous page        Return to Catalog        Next page

    In a few days, such a recorded program will be broadcast.  ¨IBefore the broadcast, Ye Jingna seemed much more excited than Jia Hongjian!  Jia Hongjian himself was quite calm and indifferent, while Ye Jing was so excited that it felt like she was going to be interviewed and participate in a program.  Regarding this, Jia Hongjian was quite happy. After all, the girl was so excited because she was excited for him!  The girl may not be so excited to be on TV, but now she is so excited for him. It is obvious that her whole mind is focused on him. What can he be dissatisfied about?  So he followed the girl to the sofa in the living room, hugged her and waited for such a program to be broadcast.

    Soon, the show will begin.  When the show started, it looked like there was no editing at all in the first few minutes!  After the host and Jia Hongjian chatted for a few words, Jia Hongjian took the lead and was then led into the ditch. It was left to Jia Hongjian to start his analysis.  All kinds of economic situations!  Ye Jing saw in front of the TV that Jia Hongjian did not talk about movie-related matters, but started to talk about the financial situation inexplicably. This really surprised her for a long time!  "Hey Hongjian, didn't you say you were going to promote the movie? Why did you start to become a financial analyst?" She asked a little confused.  "Your husband and I are just pretending, to show that we are awesome! First we have to market our personal image, and then we can market the movie!" Jia Hongjian did not explain in detail what he wanted to do, but simply said  That explains it.

    As for Jia Hongjian's detailed plan, Ye Jing was not interested in getting to know it in depth. As long as she knew that this was what Jia Hongjian did deliberately, that would be fine.  Because she has confidence in Jia Hongjian, very much confidence.  She has never seen Jia Hongjian's plans fail!  Since Jia Hongjian has always been victorious, why should she worry?  So soon.  She concentrated on watching this episode of the program with Jia Hongjian in her arms.  Jia Hongjian was also watching this program carefully at this time, but his focus was very different from Ye Jing's.  As Jia Hongjian's fianc¨¦e, Ye Jing's focus was on Jia Hongjian's performance when watching such a program. As for Jia Hongjian himself, she was quite confident in his own performance.  of.  So his focus was mainly on how much he had been cutting out while chatting for three hours!

    After all, such a special report only lasts for one hour!  So a lot of content will definitely be cut.  Although he knew that as a related party, the other party would definitely not cut out the parts that Jia Hongjian felt were the most critical, but what if some less important parts were cut out?  What if some things that Jia Hongjian thought were a bit important but others thought were unimportant were cut out?  These are definitely things to pay attention to!  Such a program was recorded and broadcast. After the recording was successful, Fox News really didn't reveal anything to Jia Hongjian about how to edit it, so it really made him curious about where it would be tampered with.  At least for now.  There weren't many tampering in the early days. Basically, it was just a little bit of editing that proved that the real estate market was led by the Federal Reserve to create a bubble. This was something Jia Hongjian felt was acceptable.

    When he explains and popularizes science in the program, his idea is to try his best to make the audience understand and believe his words, so he uses a lot of data to prove it.  Human beings are a kind of creature that is particularly easy to be conquered by data.  In modern times, science is such a thing.  It's almost like becoming a new religion.  Although 75% of people in places like the United States still believe in the existence of God, it does not mean that they do not believe in science.  They just don't want to believe in the theory of evolution and other sciences related to a series of questions such as "How did humans come about" and "Does God exist?"  But they believe in a whole range of other sciences.  So when something is explained in a "scientific" way, it's easy to fool people!  At this point, it is the same whether it is China or the United States!  And the simple and easy way to describe something that seems to be in line with science is to support it by giving examples of various data?  After all, in the eyes of modern humans, "data doesn't lie"!

    And this.  That's what Jia Hongjian often uses to fool people.  The so-called data does not lie is actually correct in itself, but there is a prerequisite for this, that is, the surveyed data is real data, without any falsification or induction!  Otherwise, such a data itself is unreal.  Where can I find someone who can't lie?  Just like Jia Hongjian once gave an example of going to the streets to interview people, he can get whatever results he wants from the TV interviewer!  how to do?  Just rely on induction!  For example, let¡¯s ask the American people whether they support a ban on guns. Before asking the people such a question, first ask the people what they think about the bad guys with guns on the market now.Whether there is a lot of love or not, the answer is definitely a lot!  Then ask them again, if they find that bad guys are violating their personal and property safety, do ordinary people like them want to have a gun in their hands, or not.  The answer is of course hope!  After all, the problem of the proliferation of guns in the United States is so serious. It is very likely that the bad guys have a gun on their waist!  At this time, to prevent the other party from infringing on their personal and property safety, of course it is better for ordinary people to have a gun than no gun!

    After inducing these two questions, I turned on the camera and asked the people being interviewed - Do you support the ban on guns?  How will the people respond at this time?  Because of the inducement of the first two questions, if this person does not want to slap himself in the face and act hypocritical, then he must express his support for banning guns!  Moreover, the inducement question Jia Hongjian gave him before implied that when the problem of gun proliferation is not solved, and when bad guys are likely to have guns, do they support "banning guns for ordinary people"?  Will you choose to support it?  But the problem is that if we really want to ban guns, we will definitely have to crack down on bad guys illegally holding guns.  After a continuous crackdown, the good guys may not have guns anymore, but the chances of bad guys holding guns will also be greatly reduced. In this case, ordinary people don't necessarily need a gun to give themselves psychological comfort, right?  After all, a gun is a weapon that can cause a lot of damage even if held by a child!  There are not many mothers in the United States who take their five-year-old children to the supermarket.  After buying a lot of things, the child was sitting in the passenger seat and dug out the pistol in the glove box, accidentally injuring his mother who was putting things in the trunk!

    So similarly, if you want to get a poll showing that ordinary people support a ban on guns, you can do the opposite of the previous inducement - first ask ordinary people two questions. The first one is to ask people about their exposure.  To the bad guy with the knife and the bad guy with the gun.  In what situations are they likely to escape?  Second question, if the government implements a zero-tolerance approach to crack down on the proliferation of guns, will the chances of bad guys possessing guns drop significantly?  After the people have answered these two questions, then ask them whether they support the ban on guns. As long as the average person does not have suicidal tendencies, they will definitely be inclined to answer "support"!  After all, the two previous induction questions hide the concept that banning guns can greatly improve people's safety. If the people don't support banning guns, doesn't it mean they don't support making themselves safer?  Doesn't this go against human subconsciousness?  So even if he himself does not support the ban on guns, he is under such an inducement.  Easy to answer support too!

    This is still induction. If you add some data selection, you can achieve the point where you can get whatever poll results you want!  Will such data lie?  On the other hand, even if the data itself is very real, without any inducement, forgery or selection, it is the original data directly and truly investigated, then data interpretation is also the most important part of data analysis!  Data doesn¡¯t lie, lies come from misinterpretation of data!  Many companies' recruitment data analysis only emphasizes data processing.  Failure to evaluate data interpretation will lead to data misinterpretation.  This leads to the conclusion that "data can lie"!

    For example, now that a set of data has been collected, many people have found that the a data and b data in this set of data are highly correlated. Every time the a data changes, the b data will also change soon. So can we get  Will a change in a lead to a change in b?  On the surface it seems possible.  But there is still a question - why can't both a and b be related to another c, and b changes when a changes in the collected data? It's just because c changes first in these data, so both a and b will be affected.  Influence!  But if a and b are taken out separately, but c does not change.  Then there are other factors that affect a and b, which will make the changes in the data of a and b completely irrelevant!

    This is the problem of data interpretation!  There are also some problems, which are also problems of data lying caused by interpretation.  For example, there is a phenomenon called the "silent majority" in the world. For example, a survey can be launched to collect statistics on whether people like or dislike something based on their ordinary comments.  The result of such statistics is basically that many people say they don¡¯t like it!  why is that?  Because only people who don't like it will take the initiative to say they don't like it. If someone likes someone without being asked, will he go around advertising that he likes this thing every day?  So if we only count everyone's speeches, the statistical results will be quite biased!  Because a large number of people who like such a thing have been silent!

    If such an example has not shown the problem of interpretation, then another example is quite obvious - during World War II, the Royal Air Force invited American statisticians to analyze the data of German ground artillery hitting allied bombers, and from a professional perspective  ,Suggest how the body armor should be strengthened to reduce the chance of being shot down by artillery fire.  However, according to the aviation technology at that time, the armor of the aircraft body could only be partially strengthened. Otherwise, the aircraft body would be too heavy, which would cause difficulty in taking off and slow control.  Statisticians drew the impact point data of injured coalition bombers into two comparison tables. The study found that the wings were the most hit parts, while the pilot's cockpit and tail were the least hit parts.

    After seeing such a data, the military combat commander at the time of course subconsciously believed that the protection of the wings should be strengthened!  Because according to such obvious data, the wings are filled with bullet holes!  It turns out that the wing is the easiest to attack and is attacked the most!  What if the wings are not strengthened?  There were only a few bullets in places such as the driver's cockpit and the tail fin. Should we reinforce those places?  But statisticians have a different view. They recommend strengthening the armor of the cockpit and tail area, even if at least bullet holes are found there!  Of course the military personnel couldn't understand it at all, and even thought the statisticians must be crazy!  But at this time, the statistician said something that shocked everyone - because all the samples counted were only damaged aircraft returning from the coalition forces!

    Which planes were shot down directly did not survive to return to the mainland to be investigated!  Which planes just crashed into the enemy country and there is no way to get them back!  Under such circumstances, those who can fly back are those who have suffered minor minor injuries, while those who have received critical injuries have a high chance of dying!  So these examples of the wing being hit in large numbers should just show that it doesn't matter if the wing is hit. Even if it is densely packed with bullet holes, the plane can still fly back. But if the cockpit and tail are not  If it is hit, the plane will most likely not be able to fly back!  This is the problem that the data caused by interpretation may lie!  In order to convince the people, the data that Jia Hongjian cited before were of course true, but to be honest, if these figures should be trimmed a little, it would not hinder the scientific nature of Jia Hongjian's conclusions.  !  In fact, although he came here this time to persuade everyone, he was trying to persuade on TV after all. There must be no obvious mistakes in the data and theory!  Otherwise, not one or two of the 300 million people in the United States would be able to see what Jia Hongjian was doing by the lake?  impossible!  As long as a few people find out and report it to the media, Jia Hongjian will be ruined!  Could he, Jia Hongjian, make such a low-level mistake?  (To be continued, please search Piaotian Literature. The novels will be better and updated faster!
Didn't finish reading? Add this book to your favoritesI'm a member and bookmarked this chapterCopy the address of this book and recommend it to your friends for pointsChapter error? Click here to report