{"id":198,"date":"2012-10-29T09:13:13","date_gmt":"2012-10-29T13:13:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/?p=198"},"modified":"2012-10-29T13:47:13","modified_gmt":"2012-10-29T17:47:13","slug":"the-role-of-data","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/2012\/10\/29\/the-role-of-data\/","title":{"rendered":"The Data Are What the Data Are"},"content":{"rendered":"

One of the first concepts I learned in graduate school, from Dr. Dale Berger<\/a>, is “The data are what the data are.”<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

What this means is that the results of your study are neutral and objective. \u00a0If they support your hypotheses, they aren’t “good,” and if they don’t support your hypotheses, they aren’t “bad.” \u00a0The data simply are essentially an objective snapshot of the world and, as such, they are value neutral.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

That doesn’t mean data can’t be wrong. \u00a0The sample in your study could be “off” (although this is a rare event) and there is always some systematic (question wording) and random (person didn’t understand the question) error in every study. \u00a0So, one of the advantages of meta-analyses (and other methods which combine study results) is their ability to combine the results of similar studies allowing the possible sampling, systemic, and random errors in individual studies to cancel each other out giving a very, very<\/strong> <\/em>good estimate of the truth of the relationship one is examining.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Which brings me to this year’s presidential election. \u00a0There are several sites available that are combining poll data in ways that ought to account for individual poll errors and should give us a good idea of what the current “truth” about voting is out there. \u00a0I prefer the Princeton Election Consortium<\/a> because it uses nothing but recent poll data (either the last 3 state polls or polls from the last week). \u00a0Other people like FiveThirtyEight<\/a>, although I am less enthusiastic about that data because it includes economic data which are probably antecedents (“causes”) along with the polls, which I consider to be the outcomes (“effects”), i.e., the dependent behavior we’re watching. (NB: \u00a0Yes, I KNOW those are not really causes and effects, but not everyone got an A in Research Methods.)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Now, I better understand why the 24 hour news sites don’t want to refer to the meta-analysis of the polls. \u00a0The latest poll result (singular) allows them to work their readers or viewers up into an emotional state (Despair! \u00a0Joy! \u00a0Romentum! Anger! \u00a0FEAR<\/strong><\/em>!!!!!), which simply isn’t the case if you look at the meta-analyses–a more stable and valid assessment of *all*<\/strong><\/span> the state polls.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

And now I also think I understand why some folks who don’t know stats that well pay more attention to individual polls than the meta-analyses. \u00a0From their perspective, I am recommending that they should try and prefer this “chocolate ice cream” as opposed the “vanilla ice cream” they’ve been eating all along. \u00a0But that’s the wrong food analogy. \u00a0The meta-analyses are more like a vegetable soup (all cooked and combined together) and I want to say “You’re eating a raw onion. \u00a0Spit it out and have a sip of vegetable soup.”<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

What is frustrating to me, though, is people who ought to know better, who have had advanced statistics, and who are still “crossing their fingers” that a standardized combination of polls is more accurate than the last poll they just saw, and which has also been incorporated into the meta-analyses. \u00a0I don’t get that.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

However, \u00a0I do understand that people do not like the results of the data analyses. \u00a0As someone who has voted for the losing candidate over 50% of the time (yes, I did just calculate that!), I get being frustrated and angry that the data aren’t going my way. \u00a0And good cow, I can’t even possibly calculate how many times that has happened in my research! \u00a0HA! \u00a0No, I mean. \u00a0Wait. ((cough, cough)) My data always supports my hypotheses. \u00a0((Ducking the lightening from the research gods and goddesses))<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

But remember: \u00a0the data are what the data are. \u00a0Could these analyses be completely wrong? \u00a0Yes, of course! \u00a0But the problem would not be in their statistical calculations. The problem would be that the polls are completely inaccurate assessments of people’s statement of what their behavior will be on voting day. \u00a0And that would mean we have NO IDEA what is going to happen on November 6. \u00a0And more importantly,\u00a0that the trends up for Obama after the DNC and sharply down after the first debate<\/a> are simply flukes \u00a0of data collection and no reflection at all about people’s opinions about, preferences for or potential voting behavior for the president. \u00a0If that’s the case, pollsters are going to have to seriously revise how they collect data. Hello, President Dewey!<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

At this point, I think it’s more accurate to believe that the data are what the data are. \u00a0That’s a hard thing to do. \u00a0It involves a controlled emotional response to ignore the hype, the interpretation, and the spin and to form your own opinion. \u00a0The data are what the data are. \u00a0And we’ll know if they are representative of the actual behavioral “truth” in one week.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

One of the first concepts I learned in graduate school, from Dr. Dale Berger, is “The data are what the data are.”   What this means is that the results of your study are neutral and objective. \u00a0If they support your hypotheses, they aren’t “good,” and if they don’t support your hypotheses, they aren’t “bad.” […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":124,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-198","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p67nDP-3c","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":205,"url":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/2012\/11\/09\/the-data-are-what-the-data-are-part-deux\/","url_meta":{"origin":198,"position":0},"title":"The Data Are What The Data Are Part Deux","author":"Anita Blanchard","date":"November 9, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"I told you so. \u00a0 In case you missed it, Sam Wang at Princeton Election Consortium and Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight\u00a0among others\u00a0\u00a0correctly predicted the outcome of Tuesday's presidential election. \u00a0And not only \"correctly predicted\" but predicted to a highly accurate degree the final electoral counts (and how FLA was a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "News"","block_context":{"text":"News","link":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/category\/news\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1,"url":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/2005\/09\/29\/hello-world\/","url_meta":{"origin":198,"position":1},"title":"Preliminary Results for the Julie\/Julia Project","author":"Anita Blanchard","date":"September 29, 2005","format":false,"excerpt":"The preliminary results from this project are now available.\u00a0\u00a0Additionally, the results from this project have been written up in Blogs as Virtual Communities:\u00a0 Identifying a Sense of Community for \"Into the Blogosphere:\u00a0 Rhetoric, Community, and Culture\". I will be writing up a final report to be published in peer reviewed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "News"","block_context":{"text":"News","link":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/category\/news\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":172,"url":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/2012\/02\/14\/dooce-sensemaking-and-community\/","url_meta":{"origin":198,"position":2},"title":"Dooce, Sensemaking, and Community","author":"Anita Blanchard","date":"February 14, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"Well, that has been an interesting ride since my last post. \u00a0 First, who knew how many people would be searching the web to try to find out why Dooce is getting divorced? According to my site stats, about 700 have stopped by this site after conducting a web search\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "News"","block_context":{"text":"News","link":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/category\/news\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":364,"url":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/2019\/09\/18\/an-entitativity-measure-and-why\/","url_meta":{"origin":198,"position":3},"title":"An Entitativity Measure and Why","author":"Anita Blanchard","date":"September 18, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"For all you folks out there google searching for Entitativity (and there may be a few) and, in particular, for those of you looking for a validated measure of entitativity, I'd like to direct you to our published peer-reviewed paper in Group Processes and Intergroup Relations. For the moment, though,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "News"","block_context":{"text":"News","link":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/category\/news\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2019\/09\/DSC_0028.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2019\/09\/DSC_0028.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2019\/09\/DSC_0028.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2019\/09\/DSC_0028.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2019\/09\/DSC_0028.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2019\/09\/DSC_0028.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":143,"url":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/2011\/09\/14\/sabbatical\/","url_meta":{"origin":198,"position":4},"title":"Sabbatical","author":"Anita Blanchard","date":"September 14, 2011","format":false,"excerpt":"I am on sabbatical this semester, although at UNCC, we call it reassignment of duties leave. \u00a0(I think it's illegal to call it sabbatical in NC. \u00a0WHOOPS!) \u00a0So I tell people that I'm on leave this fall, which of course makes them think I'm sitting around eating bonbons and watching\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "News"","block_context":{"text":"News","link":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/category\/news\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":65,"url":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/2003\/10\/07\/blogs-a-new-form-of-virtual-community\/","url_meta":{"origin":198,"position":5},"title":"Blogs: A new form of Virtual Community?","author":"clas-web","date":"October 7, 2003","format":false,"excerpt":"Preliminary Analysis Anita Blanchard, Ph.D. October 7, 2003 In July 2003, readers of the Julie\/Julia Project participated in an on-line survey. The purpose of this study was to explore whether blogs, and in particular, The Julie\/Julia Project, are a new form of virtual community. Participants were asked to respond to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Research Reports"","block_context":{"text":"Research Reports","link":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/category\/research-reports\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/198","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/124"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=198"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/198\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":201,"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/198\/revisions\/201"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=198"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=198"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pages.charlotte.edu\/anitablanchard\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=198"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}