liveBook · Manning

Statistical abuse

As explained in Grokking Statistics

The misleading use or manipulation of statistical analysis to support a preferred conclusion while obscuring weaknesses in the evidence.

Statistical abuse uses analysis to support a preferred conclusion while hiding weaknesses in the evidence. Confirmation bias, data torturing, and model torturing can create a veneer of statistical validation. section 1.4

Watch for pressures that can steer research toward a desired result:

  • A researcher is urged to use a favorable dataset to impress investors. section 1.4
  • A nonprofit seeks evidence supporting its cause rather than evidence that might marginalize it. section 1.4
  • A political candidate wants research supporting campaign policies. section 1.4
  • A researcher with industry funding makes a reassuring claim about sugar consumption. section 1.4

The favorable-dataset request

When someone asks for a dataset chosen to showcase results, treat the resulting validation cautiously: the selection itself may have steered the conclusion. section 1.4

How Grokking Statistics covers it

How deep it goes
Defines the pattern and names its mechanisms, while deferring detailed treatment of the topic.
Examples
Uses investor-facing datasets, nonprofit advocacy, campaign research, and industry-funded health claims as warning cases.
What you can do after
Evaluate statistical claims more critically by noticing incentives, selective evidence, and analysis that steers outcomes.
How it connects
Connects statistical abuse with confirmation bias, data torturing, model torturing, conflicts of interest, and critical thinking.

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.