June 23, 2014
Stat of the Week Competition: June 21 – 27 2014
Each week, we would like to invite readers of Stats Chat to submit nominations for our Stat of the Week competition and be in with the chance to win an iTunes voucher.
Here’s how it works:
- Anyone may add a comment on this post to nominate their Stat of the Week candidate before midday Friday June 27 2014.
- Statistics can be bad, exemplary or fascinating.
- The statistic must be in the NZ media during the period of June 21 – 27 2014 inclusive.
- Quote the statistic, when and where it was published and tell us why it should be our Stat of the Week.
Next Monday at midday we’ll announce the winner of this week’s Stat of the Week competition, and start a new one.
The fine print:
- Judging will be conducted by the blog moderator in liaison with staff at the Department of Statistics, The University of Auckland.
- The judges’ decision will be final.
- The judges can decide not to award a prize if they do not believe a suitable statistic has been posted in the preceeding week.
- Only the first nomination of any individual example of a statistic used in the NZ media will qualify for the competition.
- Individual posts on Stats Chat are just the opinions of their authors, who can criticise anyone who they feel deserves it, but the Stat of the Week award involves the Department of Statistics more officially. For that reason, we will not award Stat of the Week for a statistic coming from anyone at the University of Auckland outside the Statistics department. You can still nominate and discuss them, but the nomination won’t be eligible for the prize.
- Employees (other than student employees) of the Statistics department at the University of Auckland are not eligible to win.
- The person posting the winning entry will receive a $20 iTunes voucher.
- The blog moderator will contact the winner via their notified email address and advise the details of the $20 iTunes voucher to that same email address.
- The competition will commence Monday 8 August 2011 and continue until cancellation is notified on the blog.
Rachel Cunliffe is the co-director of CensusAtSchool and currently consults for the Department of Statistics. Her interests include statistical literacy, social media and blogging. See all posts by Rachel Cunliffe »
Statistic: Readers Digest – “NZ’s Most trusted” list
Source: NZ Herald, can’t find 2014 on Readers Digest website
Date: 19/6/2014
I think there is something wrong with this stat being reported elsewhere – The Herald titles as ‘Willie Apiata our most trusted again’, and lists the research as: “The annual survey is conducted by Catalyst Consultancy & Research, which polled more than 600 people on how they RATED and TRUSTED a list of Kiwi newsmakers on a scale of one to 10.” (my emphasis)
The links below report it as “NZ’s LEAST trusted”
‘Dotcom and Harawira: NZ’s least trusted’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aap/article-2661546/Dotcom-Harawira-NZs-trusted.html
‘The 10 least trusted’
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/06/the_10_least_trusted.html
‘Dotcom, Harawira NZ’s least trusted – survey’
http://www.3news.co.nz/Dotcom-Harawira-NZs-least-trusted-survey/tabid/423/articleID/349209/Default.aspx
It seems intuitively incorrect to me, is this poll actually an indication of least trusted NZers? What about the other 4,241,951 (stats.govt.nz) kiwis who weren’t included in the 100 list? I know that there are a lot of people I would trust less than anybody included on the list.
10 years ago
Statistic: According to the Herald, “Eating one of the less popular vegetables can help asthmatics breathe easier, researchers have discovered. They say eating up to two cups of lightly steamed broccoli a day can help clear the airways, prevent deterioration in the condition and even reduce or reverse lung damage.”
Problems: The research hasn’t been peer-reviewed nor published, is described as “experimental” by the people doing it (one of whom is a Masters student, so fairly new to research), and they would not reveal how the study was carried out, beyond the fact that they made their claim as a result of “laborartory tests”, which tells use precisely nothing.
Unsurprisingly, the medical director for the Asthma Foundation of New Zealand, Kyle Perrin, did not want to comment on this mraculous breakthrough without knowing how it was done. The Herald shouldn’t either.
Source: New Zealand Herald
Date: 27/6/2014
Because it’s another case of the media falling on an interesting-sounding claim without bothering to check out whether it has substance. First rule of sceince reporting: If the paper has not been peer-reviewed and published and the reseachers will not discuss methodology, run the other way.
10 years ago