liveBook · Manning

Data torturing

As explained in Grokking Statistics

Repeated or selective manipulation and analysis of data to obtain a desired finding.

Data torturing means repeatedly or selectively manipulating analyses until the data produce a desired finding—like rolling the dice until you get a Yahtzee. It can hide behind statistical validation while confirmation bias steers the outcome. section 1.4

The cereal-and-diabetes study

A cereal company receives evidence that its product may raise diabetes risk. Instead of changing the cereal, it pressures the researcher to re-evaluate the findings, search for alternative variables such as lifestyle, or bury the study. Selecting supportive studies while hiding unfavorable ones is another form of the same problem. section 1.4

Watch for data torturing when incentives encourage people to:

  • Cherry-pick findings that support a preferred narrative. section 1.4
  • Choose a favorable dataset or search among variables until a result looks compelling. section 1.4
  • Treat statistical validation as proof while ignoring confirmation bias and competing evidence. section 1.4

How Grokking Statistics covers it

How deep it goes
Defines the practice through an ethical scenario and names its warning signs, while deferring deeper treatment.
Examples
Uses a cereal-and-diabetes trial, lifestyle variables, buried studies, and favorable datasets as examples.
What you can do after
Diagnose statistical abuse by questioning cherry-picked findings, pressured re-analysis, and favorable datasets.
How it connects
Connects data torturing with confirmation bias, model torturing, statistical abuse, and statistical validation.

Related concepts

This explainer was generated by Manning's knowledge graph from the text of Grokking Statistics. The section links point to the parts of the book it draws on.