Return to Website

Number Watch Web Forum

This forum is about wrong numbers in science, politics and the media. It respects good science and good English.

Number Watch Web Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: Numerate Labour

It depends of course whether the politician was talking about the mean or the median. When most people talk about average they mean the mean. If the politician and the surgeon both understood the average to be the mean, then they both look foolish. This is because the mean can be distorted by outlying values in the data set, so that the mean (average value) will be skewed. Consider the following data set 1, 2, 3, 4, 100. The mean (average value) is 22. But four of the values are below the mean, or 80% are below the mean. So the politicians statement is not necessarily true, and the surgeon is a in-numerate for not understanding the differnece between the mean and the median, something you might expect from a man with a scientific education. If however the politician meant the median, then he made a self evidently true statement, because that is the definition of the median, and the surgeon is right to mock him.

Re: Re: Numerate Labour

Ian Reid wrote:

"It depends of course whether the politician was talking about the mean or the median. When most people talk about average they mean the mean. If the politician and the surgeon both understood the average to be the mean, then they both look foolish."

The reference to 50% surely settles it.