Misleading Statistic in Media and Politics
Misleading Statistics & Data – News Examples for Misuse of Statistics” by Mona Lebied.
https://www.datapine.com/blog/misleading-statistics-and-data/
Misleading statististic in media and politics
“In 2007, America’s united for Life an anti-abortion group presented a graph showing that the number of abortions between 2006-2013 increased, while the number of cancer screenings substantially decreased.” (Mona)
Misleading data visualization and flawed correlation
“The map data is a compilation of Planned Parenthood’s Federation of America reports on cancer screening and preventive services and abortion between 2006 to 2013. The chart points appear to indicate that 327,000 abortions are more significant in inherent value than 935,573 cancer screenings.” (Mona)
On closer examination, the chart reveals a false and misleading part of the statistic. T. The study omits the y-axis, thus invalidating the placement of the large crossed axis (Mona). According to Politifact, a reliable fact-checker in the US this chart has misleading data visualization characteristics that were purposefully employed to support the Planned Parenthood Federation of America viewpoints. Although the method of calculation and data collection is valid lack of well-defined scales makes the chart less persuasive.
Additionally, the dual-axis charts signify a flawed correlation. The dual-axis charts are to showing a misleading impression. With two visible measurement lines, it is highly likely to omit or exaggerate trends as the millions of cancer screening services charted on the left, and a thousand abortions plotted on the right can gradually show a correlation. In this light, studies can be exaggerated and manipulated with the big data. Moreover, there is enormous variability in the trend lines as people tend to focus less on the x labels that make gives the large data sets context.
Abortion is a hot-button debate that has become a sensitive topic for policymakers, law enforcement, gun retailers, and citizens. Increased analysis and evaluation of these controversies should unearth the position, arguments, debates, and questionable aspects of policymakers, the public, and the private sector. A correct analysis should include a well-defined scale to show a consistent and explicit trendline for both cancer screening and prevention and abortion. Efforts to correct the misleading and false parts of the statistic should involve the expertise of an independent research company. The existing research has a high degree of bias as the Planned Parenthood Federation of America conducted the figures. The private research entity should compile the number of cancer screening/ preventions services and abortions from the Americans United. And chart the data using the correct graphs to make the volumes of data sensible. The research should utilize line graphs to show the gradual increase and decline of both services over the years. The chart should be an outright representation of the reports gathered with explicit x labels.
Furthermore, the map data must explicitly state whether the measures are either in hundreds of millions. Additionally, there should be a separate graph to break down the vast array of services offered in Parent Parenthood to allow the policymakers to make accurate and informed decisions on women’s reproductive health funding. Overall there should be a graph to show to compare abortive and non-abortive procedures to establish a trend for the given period. From this approach, it is possible to produce a graphic that symbolizes an accurate, valid and reliable statistic that has the potential to make a positive impact in the society.
Works Cited
Mona, Lebied. Misleading Statistics Example _Discover The Potential For Misuse of Statistics& Data In the Digital Age. August 2018. https://www.datapine.com/blog/misleading-statistics-and-data/.