Skip to main content

Bobby Duffy - Four Way Interview

Bobby Duffy is Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Policy Institute at King's College, London. Prior to joining King's, Bobby was Managing Director of Public Affairs for Ipsos MORI, which is a team of around 230 researchers in London, Manchester, Edinburgh and Brussels, and Global Director of the Ipsos Social Research Institute, across around 30 countries. He has worked across most public policy areas in his career of 25 years in policy research and evaluation, and has been seconded to the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit and the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion (CASE) at the LSE. Bobby also sits on several advisory boards for think tanks and universities, as well as the Campaign for Social Science. His book, The Perils of Perception – why we’re wrong about nearly everything draws on a unique set of global studies on how people misperceive things like immigration levels, crime rates, obesity levels and many more key social realities.

 Why statistics (and surveys)? 

 I am a true believer in both the power of statistics and the power of surveys in helping us understand the world, to make better decisions and ultimately improve lives. There are so many examples of how they’ve had a real impact on the world and outcomes for so many people. Surveys have their limitations, but they are also a type of magic, where you can get a representative view of opinion, beliefs and behaviours from just interviewing a (careful) selection of the population. We need to understand what people think, how they feel, as that drives so much of how we act. 

 Why this book? 

 It’s partly because of this that I wrote the book. Understanding how wrong people are about key social and political realities is a brilliant way to understand what we’re too worried about, what we’re not worried enough about and how we see what is 'normal'. That’s really important, because what we think of as the norm affects how we behave ourselves – so if we’re very wrong about what we think other people think, that’s important to understand. The book gives an insight into the emotional nature of how we see facts: we overestimate immigration and teen pregnancy because we’re worried about them, and we’re worried about them because we’re drawn to and remember the negative more than the positive. We think the murder rate is going up (when it’s going down) because we suffer from 'rosy retrospection', forgetting the bad from the past. But it’s not just our faulty thinking that misleads us: the media, social media and politics also actively leads us astray. The key point of the book is that these two factors – how we think and what we’re told – interact with each other to create a 'system of delusion'. Politicians and the media play on these biases because they’re successful, and we read, click or vote for them because of our biases. We can start to understand and act on these biases once we’ve identified the systemic nature of them. 

 What’s next? 

 I’m currently writing a book on generational myths and realities. There is a lot of bad analysis on how different each generation is, often focusing on Millennials. A lot of this is nonsense, but the real problem is that all this noise hides some real differences. My aim in the book is to separate myth and reality by looking over as long a period as I can – not just looking at snapshots, but trying to unpick what is due to people just being different ages, what’s changed in society as a whole and what’s down to being born at a particular time. It’s very exciting for me to be able to look at decades of life stories through surveys in this way – but I also can’t wait to get the drafting over with by Christmas (I hope!). 

 What’s exciting you at the moment? 

 Well, given the book, I’m seeing everything through a generational frame – trying to bust some myths and clichés. So, for example, one of the Millennial myths that most annoyed me is that they are particularly narcissistic as a generation. This was an accusation in a number of books, based on their responses to surveys. But when you look back far enough, you find that my generation, Gen X, had almost exactly the same sort views when they were young. Being narcissistic looks much more like a feature of youth generally, and Millennials will grow out of it in the same way Gen X did.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more