Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdcsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!water!watdcsu!dmcanzi
From: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.politics
Subject: Watch them closely when they quote statistics
Message-ID: <1519@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 9-Jul-85 17:34:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.1519
Posted: Tue Jul  9 17:34:07 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 11-Jul-85 01:04:57 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 62
Xref: watmath net.women:6297 net.politics:9814

I found the following interesting uses (abuses?) of statistics in
last night's copy of the local newspaper.

Three pie charts were presented, showing how time is divided into
free time, paid work, and unpaid work (usually housework), for three
groups of people: housewives, employed men, and unemployed men.
The numbers in each wedge of the pie charts were probably percentages,
since they add up to values near 100.  The sizes of the wedges in the
pie charts did not accurately reflect the values of the numbers.
The following table shows who has how much free time, according to
the numbers, and according to measurement of the pie chart wedges:

		housewives	employed men	employed women
by the numbers	33%		34%		24%
by wedge sizes	33%		46%		17%

Ie. the pie charts appear to be deliberately distorted to make the
womens' lot seem worse than it really is, and the mens' lot look
better.

A bar graph was presented showing unemployment rates for men and women
in various countries.  In most countries, except the USA and Japan,
unemployment was higher for women (in Italy and France, extremely so).
Lest the reader be fooled by the nice figures for the USA and Japan,
the author of the article included a comment to the effect that "In
Europe only 42% of women looking for work are registered as
unemployed."  THE CORRESPONDING PERCENTAGE FOR UNEMPLOYED MEN WAS NOT
PROVIDED, and the European figure for "unofficially" unemployed women
may be larger than the American and Japanese figures for the same.

Another chart showed that the percentage of the work force consisting
of women has increased only slightly (from 31% to 35%) since 1950,
and not at all (stuck at 35%) over the last decade.  The cute diagram
illustrates 35% with a picture showing 12 men and 4 women for 1975,
15 men and 5 women for 1985.  Ie. the picture looks worse than
the numbers, just as in the pie charts.  (No interpretation of the
possible causes of this 35% ratio was offered.)

Another chart was presented showing that women in Africa do somewhat
more than a fair share of agricultural labour, and 95% of domestic
work.  No indication is given as to what percentage of the total
amount of work performed is agricultural or domestic, and how much
is the man's share of other kinds of work.  Thus, the figures given
almost certainly exaggerate the degree to which women are being
overworked in Africa.

A litle bit of advice to you all:

1) When you see statistics being quoted, check for ways in which they
   might have been exaggerated to support some political viewpoint.

2) When you quote statistics yourself, make sure they are reasonably
   complete, and really support the viewpoint that you claim they
   support, 'cause there will always be some prick like me, waiting
   to point out the flaws.  If you fudge the stats and get caught
   at it, you ruin your own credibility.
-- 
David Canzi

	"With the exception of victimless crimes (which need not
	concern us here) every single crime committed in this nation of
	ours involves a victim." -- San Francisco Chronicle