In
class this past week, we discussed the kinds of stories that Americans
tell about themselves. By realizing just how off we were in predicting
statistics about demographics, health expenditure and mortality, money,
and government mandated vacation days in the United States, as well as
its rank in those categories as compared to other countries, it became
clear to everyone that the picture we have painted of our country is far
from accurate. Overall, it is much too rosy.
As our entire conversation focused around hard-hitting statistics and mathematical ranks, I started thinking about actual framework
with which people construct their views of themselves
and the groups they belong to. I believe the reason so many of us were
so off in our estimations is that we have gradually come to believe
anecdotal stories which permeate throughout our society, about
our society, that would seemingly contradict the reality described by
the statistics. For example, because Muslim immigrants are so prevalent
in the media, we subconsciously make the assumption that they make up a
much larger percentage of our total population than they actually do (we
guessed around 5% when they actually make up less than 1%). What a
perfect conflict of psychological structure. Traversing the maze of
metacognition, I stumbled upon the thoughts of John Allen Paulos,
Professor of Mathematics at Temple University, on the fundamental
tension between stories and statistics. His opinions were published in
The New York Times “Opinions” section and can be found with this link:
Paulos
asserts that the difference between stories and statistics is the
mindset with which we approach them. Specifically, he states, “In
listening to stories we tend to suspend disbelief in order to be
entertained, whereas in evaluating statistics we generally have an
opposite inclination to suspend belief in order not to be beguiled.”
Paulos goes on to make the fascinating extension that an individual
person’s or society’s prefered structure of information tells a great
deal about their intellectual personality type and whether committing a
Type I Error or Type II Error scares them more (described in more detail
in the article).
However, not only does the structure of how information is relayed influence how different people receive and interpret it, but the structure of how information is understood
can also influence how different people use it. Speaking from personal
experience, when I saw just how far below other countries the United
States is in terms of basic provisions to its people, and having been
given the “American exceptionalism” silent spiel throughout my life, I
automatically became very competitive. America was the hero in my story
of the world, and whatever country was besting us (often some
Scandinavian country) was just acting like the Mycroft Holmes to our
Sherlock… we just had to improve and become #1 again*. But such a point
of view often has the effect of belittling the context of these issues
and how several factors can influence how different countries deal with
them. On the other hand, solely shaping one’s worldview by using
word-of-mouth stories and societal myths while providing a nation with a
shared narrative and sense of pride and identity, also shifts their
focus away from reality. What we need is a happy medium, and this can
only come when we understand how these two conflicting structures really
impact how we think and what we do, thus allowing us to make them
cooperate, not conflict.
*"Always Someone Better" TV Trope referenced (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AlwaysSomeoneBetter)
I agree that we need a happy medium. You point out the dangers of just listening to anecdotes, which are a distorted and damaging view of ourselves and our world. There are also dangers to just looking at the numbers, which I know that you mentioned briefly, but to talk from my own experience, it can be very easy to just get locked into suspended belief statistics mode. This can be good in that it allows an open mind, but the problem comes when you try to un-suspend. I think that in order to really motivate yourself to achieve something, you need to come to terms with the fact that you will be fooled. You need to belief in something, and yes that thing, whether it be a country, an idea, a person, or whetever, will have factual flaws. Only from a narrative perspective do goals become meaningful and worthwhile.
ReplyDeleteMetrics or statistics collected should be used in context also. Depending on how the numbers were collected you can get different outcomes. I agree stories and extrapolation from them are what consiously or unconsiously shape our beliefs more.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up very interesting points. What I am curious about is how much control we actually have over how we interpret information. I would like to think that we have can decide which mode to turn on and off, but I don't think I have had the experience of it being very easy. What kinds of exercises can we put ourselves through to train our brains to approach different kinds of information differently?
ReplyDeleteOn reading your post, I started thinking about the difference between the two descriptive models you mention – stories vs. statistics – in their ability to describe reality. My natural tendency is to think of a story as a subjective, potentially inaccurate narrative. The use of numbers and statistics provides supporting evidence and hence generates a more "accurate" description. However, I think this isn't necessarily true. A story could be more accurate in reflecting reality if it describes what actually happen(s)(ed). Statistics, by definition, provide a view of the collection, abstracting from individual events or actions – a meta-view, if you will. The use of numbers or mathematical expressions doesn’t necessarily make the description “more real”, rather could remove us from the underlying details, which is where reality ultimately lies.
ReplyDeleteA great post, Anya. The truth is that stories have more power than statistics and there is a natural tension. Suspension of disbelief works likely because it makes us feel good. The inherent power of story-telling lies in its capacity to allow us to escape reality. Statistics bogs us down in reality, and unless the reality is what we want it to be (the rosy picture), it is unlikely to make us feel good. So - great questions, but no easy answers. Let's just go read a good book:-)
ReplyDelete