Skip to main content

The Art of Statistics - David Spiegelhalter *****

Statistics have a huge impact on us - we are bombarded with them in the news, they are essential to medical trials, fundamental science, some court cases and far more. Yet statistics is also a subject than many struggle to deal with (especially when the coupled subject of probability rears its head). Most of us just aren't equipped to understand what we're being told, or to question it when the statistics are dodgy. What David Spiegelhalter does here is provide a very thorough introductory grounding in statistics without making use of mathematical formulae*. And it's remarkable.

What will probably surprise some who have some training in statistics, particularly if (like mine) it's on the old side, is that probability doesn't come into the book until page 205. Spiegelhalter argues that as probability is the hardest aspect for us to get an intuitive feel for, this makes a lot of sense - and I think he's right. That doesn't mean that he doesn't cover all the relevant aspects, but rather that the book doesn't take a historical approach to statistics, but rather is structured on how the mathematics is used, rather than how it was developed - which is refreshing.

Along the way, Spiegelhalter poses and then explores a number of questions, from basics such as 'How many trees are there on the planet?', through 'Do statins reduce heart attacks and strokes' to 'Does extrasensory perception (ESP) exist?' (The last one is not a general Bayesian attempt on this question, incidentally, but rather a look at how psychologist Daryl Bem managed to come up with data that was statistically significant supporting the idea.) You'll find all the power of statistics, the controversies (frequentist v. Bayesian, misuse of P-values and statistical significance) and the various ways statistics can be got wrong. And this is all presented in the way a thinking reader can understand, without any previous exposure to the mathematics of statistics.

It's not perfect. There are some sections where Spiegelhalter is not clear enough in his non-technical descriptions - for example in description of how the null hypothesis is used, use of P-values and what they really mean - but his task is not helped by the complexity of what's involved, and managing all this without using mathematics is still quite remarkable. As long as the non-technical reader is prepared to go with the flow and, if necessary, re-read a few parts, the book does a brilliant job.

I really wish there was far more of this kind of thing in school maths. The vast majority of those taking maths GCSEs will never use more than arithmetic. It would be so much better if they could be exposed to this kind of explanatory teaching where they aren't required to solve equations or whatever, but instead understand how the mathematics that influences our lives works and how it can be misused. If they then go on to maths A-level, they can easily pick up the basics in the first few weeks - for the vast majority who don't, this is what maths teaching should be like (just as science teaching at this level should have far more popular science).

Spiegelhalter is warm and encouraging - it's a genuinely enjoyable read. Yes, the reader does have to work a bit, but it is entirely worth it. This book should be required reading for all politicians, journalists, medics and anyone who tries to influence people (or is influenced) by statistics. A tour de force.

* There are some in the glossary, but you don't need to see them.
Hardback 

Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Are Eating the Earth - Michael Grunwald *****

If I'm honest, I assumed this would be another 'oh dear, we're horrible people who are terrible to the environment', worthily dull title - so I was surprised to be gripped from early on. The subject of the first chunk of the book is one man, Tim Searchinger's fight to take on the bizarrely unscientific assumption that held sway that making ethanol from corn, or burning wood chips instead of coal, was good for the environment. The problem with this fallacy, which seemed to have taken in the US governments, the EU, the UK and more was the assumption that (apart from carbon emitted in production) using these 'grown' fuels was carbon neutral, because the carbon came out of the air. The trouble is, this totally ignores that using land to grow fuel means either displacing land used to grow food, or displacing land that had trees, grass or other growing stuff on it. The outcome is that when we use 'E10' petrol (with 10% ethanol), or electricity produced by ...

Battle of the Big Bang - Niayesh Afshordi and Phil Harper *****

It's popular science Jim, but not as we know it. There have been plenty of popular science books about the big bang and the origins of the universe (including my own Before the Big Bang ) but this is unique. In part this is because it's bang up to date (so to speak), but more so because rather than present the theories in an approachable fashion, the book dives into the (sometimes extremely heated) disputed debates between theoreticians. It's still popular science as there's no maths, but it gives a real insight into the alternative viewpoints and depth of feeling. We begin with a rapid dash through the history of cosmological ideas, passing rapidly through the steady state/big bang debate (though not covering Hoyle's modified steady state that dealt with the 'early universe' issues), then slow down as we get into the various possibilities that would emerge once inflation arrived on the scene (including, of course, the theories that do away with inflation). ...

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that â€˜Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...