The Steak Hypothesis

My little sister made an astute observation about our father and the way he handles us when we are in distress.  She noted that anytime one of is us upset about something, our father suggests we have a steak.  She further posited that steak does in fact improve any situation by approximately 30-40%.  I decided to test this hypothesis.   

The world looks like this outside.

Inside, this is what studying for a written prelim looks like. 

This is my effort at a 40% improvement in my circumstances this evening.

Ideally it would be paired with this, alas, the bottle was empty.  Oh, churl, drunk all and left no friendly drop to help me after...

 So, in the end I am left with this...

   ... ~55% improvement.

Data Use and Ethics

I've been working on this piece for a few months now trying to refine my points to create something coherent and concise.  It's hard to say how successful I've been at either.  I think the final impetus for finishing it was certain topics in this post about a session at the Joint Statistical Meetings, this post about data scientists vs statisticians, and a discussion on MPR about the recent data hack at Target. 

As an individual just on the periphery of graduate level statistics, and someone from a profession where ethics are prominent and a part of almost every discussion, my concerns are somewhere between philosophical and questioning.  As a professional consumer of data analysis and statistics, and an occasional creator, I am concerned and confused about some of the seemingly inadequate elements of both statistics and data use culture.  I think some of my concerns are complicated by the transdiscipline nature of statistics and data analysis; so many people using them in so many different fields of inquiry.  I also recognize that my concerns could potentially be lobbied against any number of professions and schools of thought.  I would add, however, that ethical and social implications of any practice should be examined widely and openly for any profession, field of inquiry, school of thought, or general hobby.  Question and lobby away as far as I'm concerned. 

First, as far as "statisticians" and "data scientists" go, as an outsider, it's like Spy vs. Spy.  I would contend, though, that statisticians who work as educators have a significant hand in producing budding "data scientists" anytime they are working with undergraduate students.  Most of the students are not going to be statisticians, and they many only need the bare minimum in statistics to move on in their field.  They learn a few cool ways to make visualizations in R, or less cool visualizations in SPSS, and they go on their way.  Collecting data is unbelievably easy.  Also, finding data to play around with is equally easy.  Understanding the deeper concepts and responsibilities related to analysis, inference, and interpretation, that's something else.  I do understand that part of educating the masses is through undergraduate education, however, higher education is a privileged experience.
  
I have a few questions and thoughts surrounding the professional culture of statistics and data use.  I think my general questions/concerns are: 

• Is there a social and/or ethical obligation to provide education on a given subject to the general population by individuals trained in such subjects?  For example, what level of action and advocacy for accuracy, open discussion, and education falls on learned individuals from specific disciplines regarding society at large?

• If information is created to be consumed, should the consumers be educated?

• Also, where does the education regarding the ethical use of statistics and data begin? 

How and Why?

I struggle with the notion that any field of inquiry is not responsible for a broad dissemination and defense of the information they produce resulting in education of the masses. Not only is it good for society, it protects the discipline from misinformation about what it is they do everyday and why they are important to society. In addition to this, society provides the data that data scientists use in their work. Educating people about the role they play in another individual's livelihood seems reasonable. Statisticians and data analysts use public (or private) data to make all sorts of inferences for all sorts of purposes, and they profit from it (sometimes). Why is educating the subjects of their analyses any different than educating a corporate client about the analyses performed and conclusions drawn?

Additionally, the argument that society at large should get no further consideration because everyone benefits from changes or opportunities that result from decisions based on statistical analyses is weak. It may be true to a degree, but it lacks sufficient nuance to capture the whole situation. How can we be educated consumers if we have no foundation to think critically or to appropriately critique information provided to us? Or to critique the methods by which our personal data is collected? (Ahem, Target shoppers and Gmail users)? Is it possible to make an informed decision about something without having a basic understanding of what that something is? If our educators have gaps in their knowledge, how large is the gap they leave in the knowledge of students they teach? 

In the past, the general population was guided by the intuition of individuals either naturally gifted or trained (sometimes both) to use that intuition for inquiry. Currently, as a society we are pushing the concept of omnipresent data collection, analysis, and interpretation. There continues to be some reliance on the "expert" knowledge of statisticians and trained analysts, but it seems that society is moving toward a more self-directed, self-informed, corporation supported conceptualization of data collection and use. While there are benefits to this, there are equally valid and concerning problems as well. How do we ensure data collection, use, and dissemination are done ethically and in an informed manner? Where does it start? I do not think that statisticians and data analysts are the general cause of data misuse and unethical behavior. I do, however, believe that they are uniquely positioned to mitigate the damage and harm done by the real trouble sources.

It seems likely that most formalized education in applied statistics and data work is grounded in being aware of the assumptions being made regarding the analyses and being prepared to support your position with sound theoretical or substantive reasoning. That's certainly been the bulk of my training in statistics, which by general consensus has been excellent at the graduate level. But what about the steps before and after the analysis? Ethics should be an element of all parts of an inquiry or process. Data is absolutely tied to a context, and when that context is not attended to, the possibility of erroneous conclusions and eventual harm becomes more likely. 

I should state that my idea of ethics in conjunction with data use and statistics includes ethical considerations given to: whether or not data should even be collected, why and how the data are collected and stored, why and how the data are analyzed, why and how the data are presented in this way or that, why and how the "findings" and "results" are used, and perhaps the most seemingly overlooked consideration, the level of education and advocacy surrounding the appropriate and responsible use of data. 

I recognize that often times statisticians are brought in after data has been collected, and they have no say in the methods used. However, with support and persistence, a culture of responsible data, especially big data, could be fostered. And who better to cultivate it then the people who have to work with the data?  I cannot count the number of times I've heard comments on the quality of data people obtain and the grumbling that comes with having to get it in proper order for analysis.

Who and When?

The America Statistical Association has published ethical guidelines that outline a number of expectations for individuals working in the field of statistics. Some of the statements regarding ethical obligations and professional citizenship include:

• Support for improved public understanding of and respect for statistics.

• Exposure of dishonest or incompetent uses of statistics.

• "...all practitioners of statistics, whatever their training and occupation, have social obligations to perform their work in a professional, competent, and ethical manner."

• "Before participating in a study involving human beings or organizations, analyzing data from such a study, or accepting resulting manuscripts for review, consider whether appropriate research subject approvals were obtained...Consider also what assurances of privacy and confidentiality were given and abide by those assurances."

The American Statistical Association states that students should be encouraged to follow their ethical guidelines. In practice, are they? How are statisticians and the potential data scientists they create supposed to act in accordance with these guidelines in an ethical manner if they are not aware of them? Some time ago I asked a friend, a statistics educator, how students were exposed to ethical reasoning and practice in his program. The response was that it is the student's responsibility to seek that information out. It was acknowledged that there are discussions around appropriate research design and how you treat participants in research etc. but that was essentially it. He also implied, by referencing the implementation of ethics courses at Harvard and the lack of apparent change in ethical operating in the business world, that education around ethics and ethical reasoning has little impact. I wondered how that might change if all business programs included an overt culture of ethical reasoning and action as well as ethics courses? It seems that all fields of scientific inquiry suffer from the deluded notion that their own impatience with the rate of measurable or otherwise demonstrable change equates to no change. The drive to find "significant" results at all costs has derailed many academic careers, and negatively impacted society at large (Who wants a vaccination?). It also perfectly exemplifies the need for ethics training.

Ethical guidelines are created to protect other people from you and your profession or discipline. They are also created as a form of recourse for other professionals to be gatekeepers in their profession or discipline. If those are not reason enough for ethical guidelines and training, the fact that established guidelines can provide recourse for consumers who experience unethical behavior by giving a framework for what to expect should be considered. The establishment of, and education around, ethics will not eliminate unethical behavior; and I suppose it could be argued that it does not necessarily reduce it either. However, it does allow others (professionals and consumers) to be informed and mindful. 

The requirement of obligatory ethics courses and an overt culture of ethics has certainly had an impact in the field of Counseling Psychology. For example, in my current program from the first day of classes we are informed we are bound by the ethical principles of the American Psychological Association. Our syllabi include this statement, and it is highlighted in our program handbooks at both the Master's and PhD level. We are also informed that failure to comply with these guidelines is grounds for dismissal from the program (and later from the profession). Counselors in training are required to take courses in professional ethics, and then continuing education once we are licensed. Does this prevent all unethical behavior? Absolutely not. Some of it? Maybe. Perhaps the ultimate point of ethical guidelines is not prevention, but the creation of informed consumers and colleagues...

A Snapshot?

For the sake of an example in comparison to Counseling Psychology, I'll use the the resident Quantitative Methods program in my department. (This is a small sample to be sure, and it is hopefully not representative of all Quant. programs around the world.) However, going local, according to the information provided openly to prospective students and the information on their website, it appears that there are no such parallel indications or requirements for ethics. While the general program handbook makes one mention of professional ethics associated with research methodology, there are no courses on ethics, and the single comment on professional ethics is only stated for students at the PhD level. This is concerning given that MA level individuals are just as likely to have contact with the general public as PhD level data scientists, if not more. Neither the Master's handbook, nor the Doctoral handbook makes a single statement involving the word "ethics" or the ethical code to which students are bound during their course of study. The handbooks also fail to indicate where students should look for professional guidance on ethics. None of the course descriptions provided on the website include the word "ethics" or indicate how ethical reasoning and principles are applied to the work of individuals working in quantitative fields.

Most individuals are born with the ability to learn language yet we go through years of formal education to learn to communicate effectively.  Athletes are typically born with the ability to run, swim, jump, breath, kick, throw etc.  However, they also spend years in training to enhance their performance.  Statisticians and data scientists are likley naturally skilled with numbers and good internal visualizations of data; why have advanced degrees if it is something they can learn to cultivate on their own?  "Critical thinking" skills are often a target skill for universities to "improve".  If we can improve critical thinking performance through education, why not ethical reasoning?   

This whole topic is such a bear:

   

To the Guy Who Followed Me Across Campus Tuesday Night

Hi there.  You might remember me.  We spoke on Tuesday night in a poorly lit, somewhat desolate and isolated spot behind the student union as I was walking to my car.  I have to say, I feel somewhat badly about our interaction.  But maybe I'm getting ahead of myself.  In case you don't happen to remember me, let me briefly remind you of the situation, my memory of it anyway.

I was just leaving one of the classes I TA for on campus.  It was about 6:30pm, and it was starting to get dark out.  It takes me about 20 minutes to walk to my car from the building I TA in.  I don't recall walking past you at any point in my walk, which suggests that you were either behind me, or you were in a very inconspicuous spot somewhere along the way.  When you first stopped me, you were about 20 yards behind me which also indicates you had followed from some distance.

You shouted "Excuse me," twice.  As I realized more fully I was walking toward an even more desolate and isolated parking ramp, instead of ignoring you completely, I stopped and turned around.  As you approached, I notice four things right away.  You were wearing a hoodie with the hood fully up and tied, both of your hands were in your pockets nowhere to be seen, you weren't wearing a backpack of any kind (a tad unusual for a student), and there was no one else around. I have to admit, these observations led to a very distinct sort of fear.  And this is where I start to feel badly about our interaction in some ways.

I lied to you, a lot.  It was not only disrespectful to you, it was beneath me, and I represented myself and my personal values poorly.  You asked if I was in a specific program and commented that you thought you recognized me.  I did not believe you, but I honestly replied that I was not in that program.  I started to back away from you and head toward a more populated, well lit area.  You followed.  You then asked my name as you came around my front and blocked my way.  Somewhat alarmed, I chose to give you a fake name.  You asked what program I was in.  Perhaps you didn't notice it, but I dropped into a moro-ashi dachi stance, a classic karate fighting stance, and placed my bag behind myself so my arms would be free.  I gave you a fake program.  You twitched and looked around quickly, almost as if you were watching for someone or something.  Then you asked what kind of work I did in my program.  Feeling very uncomfortable, but preferring non-violence or confrontation, I again lied and took a step away from you.  But, hey, there you were again with the small talk!  You turned quickly as two girls walked by at the far end of the square.  You stepped closer and asked what I liked to do for fun.  I pointedly stated I was too busy for fun, and what little time I do have I often spend with my partner (that was genuine truth).  I stepped into the potential view of a group of guys hanging out in a room on the ground floor of the building next to us as you stepped closer and asked my name again.  While glancing at the window into the room of guys hanging out, I gave the fake name again.  When you looked up and noticed the people in the building, you visibly frowned, looked around, and took off.  I waited until you turned the corner, and then I waited a few more minutes.  Finally, I ran to the parking ramp, ran to my car, and drove home.  

I should be up front in noting that I'm really angry that my natural response was fear.  I'm mad that I have to be on guard when walking alone in the evening or at night.  It really sucks that I can't just walk to my car without thinking about my personal safety.  I'm angry that I was put in a position to feel intimidated, scared, and unsafe.  You shouldn't just be able to stop me and ask personal questions!  Or should you?  Actually, that is part of the problem-- maybe you should be able to approach me without my reaction being about fear and safety.  I'm upset that you were automatically a threat in my mind.  After reflecting on this, I realized maybe you would be angry about this too, not only on my behalf but in regard to the fact that you are automatically a threat just because you are a guy.  If you aren't angry, perhaps you will reconsider based on my reflections.  I should be able to walk to my car anytime, anywhere without so much as a second thought about safety.  You, however, should also be able to approach a woman, or any person actually, without being stereotyped as a threat simply because you're male.  My partner, father, brother, nephews, and male friends should be able to move through life without being seen as an inherent threat to female safety as much as I should be able to live without being seen as a pair of breasts and nice smile.  While my reaction is very consistent with my personal experiences and the messages I receive as a woman in US society, I'm guessing some of your behavior was the result of your experience as a man and messages you receive about what that means.  This is hypocritical and a double standard, and I missed an opportunity to share a different message with you.
 
I realize I did not treat you respectfully.  What I should have done was stated I was feeling uncomfortable and asked you politely to step away from me.  By not doing this, I did not give you the opportunity to correct my assumption that you were a threat.  Instead, by not saying anything, I may have given you the impression that I was interested in speaking with you.  Not only that, but I disempowered myself by not being honest.  Also, if you really thought you knew me, I responded quite rudely.  In addition to this, I suppose it is possible you just wanted to talk to me and were unable to think of a better way to introduce yourself.  Regardless, I made a potentially unfair assumption about you, and I apologize.

I am not sorry, however, for being mindful of my surroundings.  I am not naive, and with the influx of crime alerts coming out on campus not attending to my surrounds would be foolhardy.  If you were an actual threat and demonstrated that, I would have done whatever was necessary to protect myself.  Had you attempted to engage in any sort of physical contact with me, I would likely not be expressing as much concern for the situation.  No, I think my general concern about our interaction is centered on respect as you did not demonstrate you were a threat beyond some agitated, nervous behavior, a very poor location, and a poor opening line.

I appreciate our interaction as I think back on it despite the fact that I was fairly terrified the entire time we were talking.  It has highlighted some of my own thinking and some potential blind spots.  I think the assumption of men as inherent threats is a blind spot for a considerable number of people.  Until society is ready to support interactions that are not based on fear or poor assumptions, however, I might recommend approaching people in well lit areas, hands visible, and with honestly.            
   

Random Things That Made Me Smile Today

First, I got an email from Statistician with this link in it today: http://skeletorislove.tumblr.com  I wish I could come up with a witty something or other about Skeletor but I just can't-- my mind is wiped...other than to say, good mental health could lead to an Eternia of happiness for all of the Masters of the Universe, yuk, yuk, yuk.

Second, one of my little sisters has a pretty serious and long standing obsession with penguins.  She actually answers to both, "Penguin Pete" and "Penelope Penguin" in the course of a conversation.  This is what you do with literally 6 feet of snow in my family:

Apparently, his name is "Parry."  Parry happens to be wearing my tie.  I don't know exactly why Parry was chosen as the name, a name fail if there ever was one.  I would have gone with Philbert, Polonious, or Pascal.  Regardless, Parry the Penguin is pretty amazing.

Third, in order to make it through my PhD program without completely decompensating, my use of Star Wars references has spiked, as has my now irrational desire to watch the un-besmirched versions of the Original Trilogy to cope/avoid life (a decades old coping skill for me).  Most of the time, I manage to contain them to my own head; however, sometimes I can't help but share them.  I think this was particularly evident when I had to abbreviate Empire Strikes Back (ESB) in a post, and I ended up with the very acronym of the building my program is located in.  Of course, this was absurdly amusing to me because I can identify a fairly accurate proxy for most of the characters using people in my department.  It was less funny when I had to explain to my cohort-mates why it's so amusing that SharkFox is Jabba the Hut, my primary advisor is C3PO, the Dean is Sarlacc, and the main office is almost as bad as the pit of carkoon.

Smile.  Random things are happening.  


 

    

Fred Armisen in a Wig

Have you ever had a Chris Farley freak out?  Like, a real, for the love of God, how could you not have had a Chris Farley freak out, freak out?  I had one recently.  It really highlighted the impact stress can have on a person.  It also illuminated the twisted priorities that develop as a graduate student.  Now, you may not know who Chris Farley is, which is sad, remedy that.  Or you might not understand how a CF freak out would actually look in any place other than the SNL stage.  Let me paint you a picture.  First, a CF freak out has to be totally random and of a subject matter that is utterly ridiculous.  It is also punctuated by seeming extreme emotional investment in something.  And it often results in a rough voice afterward.  If you click the link above, you should have a very good idea.  Now, in some ways, a Chris Farley freak out is kind of like Bill Cosby's description of a conniption (also, Bill Cosby Himself is one of the best comedy albums ever).  Either one is fairly accurate for the situation I'm writing about.

If my freak out were a skit, it would have played out like this (yes, I know I'm blending casts):

Rita [Fred Armisen in a wig] and Top Hat (her partner, played by Rob Schneider in a golf hat) are asleep.  It's about 5am.  Top Hat is totally oblivious to the world; Rita is tossing and turning while mumbling.

Top Hat: (inhale, exhale, inhale, exhale, inhale, exhale, inhale, exhale)
Rita: (asleep, tossing, batting at the air) Rrmmg.  Nevada, why are you busing people with severe mental health diagnoses and concerns out of state to leave them on the street?  
Top Hat: (looks angelic and peaceful) Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Rita: (tossing once again) No!  iPhone users, you suck.  How is it ok to exploit homeless people so you can price gouge foreign buyers?!
Top Hat: (dreaming of a pair of Dahlquist DQ-10 speakers)
Rita: (sits bolt upright fully awake, smacks Top Hat's arm) We don't have any milk!
(cat sleeping on foot of bed promptly falls off)
Top Hat: Huh?! Wha? What? What?!
Rita:  We don't have any milk; you didn't get any yesterday!
Top Hat: (looking around in circles trying to understand what the issue is and why his arm hurts) Milk?  What?  I'll get some at the store tomorrow.
Rita: (morphs into Chris Farley in a very Hulk-esq manner, grabs Top Hat's shirt at the collar and "explains")
IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY MILK, I CAN'T DRINK MY COFFEE!!!  IF I DON'T DRINK COFFEE, MY WORK DOESN'T GET DONE.  I CAN'T HAVE THAT!  FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, I NEED MY COFFEE WHICH MEANS I NEED MILK!!  MILK!
Top Hat: (realizing his bed-mate may have gone slightly off the deep end or possibly be in a dream induced rage, giggles nervously and pats Rita on the head while delicately extricating himself from her grasp) Uh, riiigghht, ok.  I'll get you milk for your coffee (if I can't find anything stronger).  Let's go back to sleep for now.
Rita: Milk! You promise?  I have...to have...milk....coffeeeee.....zzzzzzzzzz

Sometimes, it really is the little things that matter.  Let the girl have some coffee!  I won't even ask to marry your grandmother.    





  

Comics, an Affliction and Burning Desire

From time to time I make pathetic little Rita comic strips to amuse myself.  While there are certainly far more entertaining stick figure drawings out there (I'm looking at you xkcd* and Hyperbole and a Half) these are really for my own sanity maintenance.  Not all of them involve statistics, but that is one subject that requires routine maintenance.  *This video of Richard Feynman explaining physics with a chess analogy is amazing.  Also, this one on his conceptualization of science, God, and living is stellar.   

And then there's this:

Bonus points to Snarky Squirrel for suggesting that this comic is really a projective test illustrating my "burning desire to learn advanced statistics."

Cli_o_is

The topics of the day: the clitoris and war.  Two things utterly unrelated to one another in reality at the moment, however, my mind sees a connection.  Interestingly enough, it wasn't until later I thought of Lysistrata.

First:

Sophia Wallace is brilliant.  She is also an artist.  A brilliant artist.  Her personal campaign to provide education and conversation about female sexuality and sexual organs, particularly the clitoris, is amazing. I'm quite seriously considering getting Cliteracy vs. Phallusy tattooed somewhere.  The Huffington Post piece linked above is pretty good.  Anyone with a clit, or anyone who has sex with someone who has a clit should take the first step toward cliteracy and check it out.  Whether "it" is the Huff Post piece or a clit I'll leave up to you.     

Second:

Somehow, I imagine this to be how the members of the US Legislative branch make decisions about things like war.  The whole four minutes pretty much sums it up.