Essay Writing

“STATISTICS CONCEAL AS MUCH AS THEY REVEAL.” DISCUSS THIS CLAIM WITH

REFERENCE TO TWO AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE.

Submitted by

Student Name
ID
Date

1|Page
Essay Writing

Essay Writing
This statement is hugely on point to the situation that people are currently living in now.

We are now living in a world of alternative facts, misinformation, and statistics that are carefully

selected to put an individuals' argument forward. Driven by politics, personal bias, opinion, and

funding, statistics can be manipulated to fulfill the desire of the certain party involved. The

Cambridge Dictionary defines "conceal" as "to prevent something from being seen or known

about" and "reveal" as "to make known or show something surprising or that was previously

secret" (Cambridge University Press). Additionally, Merriam-Webster dictionary defines

"Statistics" as "a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and

presentation of masses of numerical data" (Merriam-Webster). The areas of knowledge

associated with this claim are mathematics and ethics, these areas of knowledge allow a deeper

understanding of how statistics may be manipulated to conceal information. With emotion and

logic being prominent ways of knowledge regarding this claim as well. Through the use of these

Areas of Knowledge (AoK) and Ways of Knowing (Wok). This essay investigates how statistics

can conceal and reveal information and how the interpreter of the statistics is the main cause

behind this claim being brought up.

Statistics as a branch of mathematics uses an extensive knowledge of mathematics, which

is a huge factor in how statistics are treated and why they can conceal and reveal information.

The AOK of mathematics shows how logic-based assumptions can be misused to conceal

important information while revealing incorrect information. If mathematics is used while

dealing with statistics using logic-based assumptions, all factors affecting those statistics must be

considered as statistics can be collected in different conditions. In 1999, Sally Clark, a British

lawyer, was imprisoned for the murder of her two sons, who tragically died less than a year apart

2|Page
Essay Writing

of "sudden infant death syndrome." Since there were no witnesses to the accusations against

Sally that she killed her sons, her trial consisted primarily of highly qualified medical

professionals (Scheurer). The logic used at the trial was that since the sudden infant death

syndrome occurs around one in 8,500 in a professional "non-smoking" family unit. Professionals

used by the prosecution "logically" squared the formula, which would mean the chance of both

of her sons to die in the same conditions was around one in 73 million. The jury believed the

correct mathematical logic was used and therefore convicted Sally of the accusations.

Although it may seem that correct logic-based mathematics was initially used in this trial,

these calculated statistics revealed and concealed the wrong information as the entire

mathematical logic was incorrect. The prosecution's professionals made incorrect assumptions,

mainly that the conditions of death for both children were the same, which led to the logic behind

squaring the initial probability being incorrect. External genetic factors and environmental

factors were not considered fully, so this conviction was overturned alongside two other separate

convictions. This is known as the Simpsons Paradox when lurking variables are not considered.

In a rather reputable newspaper at the time in Britain, the headline stated the expert had said "the

chance that Sally Clark was innocent was 73,000,000 to 1," which was bluntly incorrect.

Although these statistics used by the professionals showed that it was indeed a rare event that

these two children died of sudden infant death syndrome, it was not as less of a chance as stated

by the professional, thus revealing the rare nature of the event but concealing the correct

mathematical probability behind this event which is still unknown (Orlin). The correct way

would be that these are probabilities meaning it is not necessarily proof as it was used as in the

previous case. Often media groups use these types of probabilities as definitive answers to

3|Page
Essay Writing

questions and put them into big headlines, as seen with the Sally Clark case, which instantly

reveals one side of the story without any context while concealing the rest of the details.

However, sometimes logic-based assumptions in statistics using mathematics are justified

and allow for proper conclusions revealing correct information. Allowing for the creation of

statements of statistical significance and probability. For example, thanks to mathematical

models, studies have shown that lung cancer is 20 times greater in cigarette smokers than non-

smokers (CDC). This study was conducted multiple times with different group sizes and during

different periods, allowing for the statistics' interpretation to be more supported. Ethics plays a

huge role and is associated with this claim. If influencers are using their emotion and logic,

statistics can be manipulated to communicate the influencer's personal bias, which is rooted

within the AOK of ethics.

Using statistical terms, such as mean, median, mode, range, correlation, and variance,

allows statistical data to be presented differently as to the influencer's desire concealing and

revealing what they want. For example, if a company is paying most of their employees in a 10-

person Company $30,000, they are paying one person $500,000. The employer logically and

technically can advertise a new job by saying their average pay is $80,000 when in reality, the

new employee will most likely be paid around $30,000. This shows how although the data had

an outlier within its sample size, the influencer decided to use that to their benefit, which can be

considered logical (Brilliant.org). Still, they did not consider whether this would be ethical or

not. Another example using the term variance can be shown if, for example, if a group of

researchers is conducting a study and 90% of them obtain bad results while 10% obtain the

desired results, it could be said that there is a lot of variances so do not rush to a judgment. In

these scenarios, personal bias and ethics are very prominent because people who want certain

4|Page
Essay Writing

outcomes, whether they be political, financial, or personal, will try to use whatever way possible

to manipulate the data. This type of behavior can be seen in many different situations in the real

world, from having political parties trying to defame others using skewed statistics to have

companies using it to save their product.

On the other side, in most studies, outliers that may skew the data are thrown out,

allowing for the more ethical use of those statistical terms. In addition, outliers such as the ones

mentioned in the examples above are ineffective when statistical figures and models show where

all the data is being represented. Having outliers will decrease statistical power, which makes the

data less significant. An example, however, where media outlets have used to create an illusion

of how much of a difference there is in the example in a poll is by looking at the top of bar

graphs and zooming into the picture, having the scale start from a different value. This makes it

easy to exaggerate the difference in a poll. However, with most statistical figures, it is quite hard

to manipulate data as the visual display cannot hide much in most scenarios. Therefore, the use

of ethics can conceal and reveal information based on how it is presented.

The way statistics can be interpreted to conceal and reveal information often allows for

statistics to conceal as much as they reveal. As Ashish Mahajan once said, "Statistics are like

swimwear-what they reveal is suggestive but what they conceal is vital." There is a lot of room

for statistics to be interpreted in many ways (data&donuts). Through the use of the AOKs of

mathematics and ethics and the WOKs of emotion, which represents personal bias and logic,

statistics can be seen to be both trusted and not trusted. The mathematics used in presenting

statistics can often be misused, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and this is also known as

the Simpsons paradox. With the AOK of ethics having its presence over the entire issue of using

statistics, interpreters, and influencers, ethics will determine what the statistics will conceal and

5|Page
Essay Writing

reveal at that moment. Overall, there are cases where statistics conceal more than they reveal,

reveal more than they conceal, and conceal as much as they reveal depending on how the

collected data is treated.

In summary, this essay has investigated how statistics can conceal and reveal information

and how the statistics interpreter is the leading cause behind this claim being brought up. The

AOK of mathematics shows how logic-based assumptions can be misused to conceal vital

information while revealing incorrect information. Additionally, the way statistics can be

interpreted to conceal and reveal information often allows for statistics to conceal as much as

they reveal.

6|Page
Essay Writing

Works Cited

Brilliant.org. Simpson's Paradox. n.d. Internet. 01 01 2021. <https://brilliant.org/wiki/simpsons-

paradox/>.

Cambridge University Press. Cambridge Dictionary. n.d. Internet. 01 01 2021.

<https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/conceal>.

Cashmore, Catherine. Property statistics: What they reveal and what they conceal. 23 07 2012. Internet.
23 11 2020. <https://www.urban.com.au/expert-insights/investing/17537-a-story-of-statistics-
what-they-reveal-is-suggestive-but-what-they-conceal-is-vital-aaron-levenstein>.

CDC. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. 22 September 2020.

data&donuts. data&donuts. 9 19 2017. Internet. 23 11 2020. <https://www.dataanddonuts.org/cancer-

the-brand/statistics-are-like-swimwear-what-they-reveal-is-suggestive-but-what-they-conceal-
is-vital>.

Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster. n.d. Internet. 01 01 2021.

<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/median>.

Orlin, Ben. Why Not to Trust Statistics. 13 07 2016. Internet. 01 01 2021.

<https://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2016/07/13/why-not-to-trust-statistics/>.

Scheurer, Vincent. Convicted on Statistics? 2011. Internet. 01 01 2021.

<https://understandinguncertainty.org/node/545>.

7|Page