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 Infinity Machine - Sebastian Mallaby ****

It's very quickly clear that Sebastian Mallaby is a huge Demis Hassabis fan - writing about the only child prodigy and teen genius ever who was also a nice, rounded personality. After a few chapters, though, things settle down (I'm reminded of Douglas Adams' description of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ) and we get a good, solid trip through the journey that gave us DeepMind, their AlphaGo and AlphaFold programs, the sudden explosion of competition on the AI front and thoughts on artificial general intelligence. Although Mallaby does occasionally still go into fan mode - reading this you would think that AlphaFold had successfully perfectly predicted the structure of every protein, where it is usually not sufficiently accurate for its results to have direct practical application - we get a real feel for the way this relatively unusual company was swiftly and successfully developed away from Silicon Valley. It's readable and gives an important understanding of...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...
Post a Comment
Read more