Jump to content

Why anecdotes are not evidence (and are in fact dangerous)

Recommended Posts

No, to me it isn't evidence because of the various reasons already listed, confirmation bias, sample bias, statistically insignificant sample size, geographically and temporally limited samples and so on.

Anecdotes are not evidence when given in support of a theory/supposition about a trend.

 

I think the example in question was

Theory - "children spend less time outdoors today than in the past"

Anecdote supposedly evidencing that - "well my children spend more time indoors"

 

NOT evidence, not even interesting. Entirely pointless observation akin to "my grandad smoked 30 a day until the age of 95 so smoking is good for you".

 

I would accept it as evidence about the amount of time that Hypers children spend indoors, because then it's not an anecdote, but simply a factual measurement (albeit estimated) being relayed. But the amount of time Hypers children spend anywhere does not support or undermine any theory about children in general, because they are not children in general, they are a specific data point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideally thought they'd prefer not to have any anecdotes, personal recall being the weakest form of evidence.

 

Interesting that you say anecdotes are not evidence and now say they are the weakest form of evidence, so they are evidence after all.

 

---------- Post added 19-03-2015 at 15:38 ----------

 

No, to me it isn't evidence because of the various reasons already listed, confirmation bias, sample bias, statistically insignificant sample size, geographically and temporally limited samples and so on.

Anecdotes are not evidence when given in support of a theory/supposition about a trend.

 

I think the example in question was

Theory - "children spend less time outdoors today than in the past"

Anecdote supposedly evidencing that - "well my children spend more time indoors"

 

NOT evidence, not even interesting. Entirely pointless observation akin to "my grandad smoked 30 a day until the age of 95 so smoking is good for you".

 

I would accept it as evidence about the amount of time that Hypers children spend indoors, because then it's not an anecdote, but simply a factual measurement (albeit estimated) being relayed. But the amount of time Hypers children spend anywhere does not support or undermine any theory about children in general, because they are not children in general, they are a specific data point.

 

Until a million people say the same, and then you have some very useful information/evidence made up of individual anecdotes. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read again what I wrote. I said personal recall being the weakest form. Anecdotes are not evidence at all.

 

A study asking structured questions of a million parents, and compensating for the various problems with personal recall is no longer anecdotal. A single "interesting story" offered by someone is anecdotal and is not evidence.

Edited by Cyclone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Read again what I wrote. I said personal recall being the weakest form. Anecdotes are not evidence at all.

 

Originally Posted by Cyclone View Post

Ideally thought they'd prefer not to have any anecdotes, personal recall being the weakest form of evidence.

 

The sentence is about anecdotes, which are the personal recollection of an event.

 

And the personal recall of events is evidence.

 

---------- Post added 19-03-2015 at 15:46 ----------

 

Read again what I wrote. I said personal recall being the weakest form. Anecdotes are not evidence at all.

 

A study asking structured questions of a million parents, and compensating for the various problems with personal recall is no longer anecdotal. A single "interesting story" offered by someone is anecdotal and is not evidence.

 

But a few thousand interesting stories offered by a variety of people are still anecdotes and useful evidence.

Edited by Lucy75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The sentence is about anecdotes, which are the personal recollection of an event.

 

And the personal recall of events is evidence.

 

So can we conclude that you disagree with the title of the thread, and you believe that it's fine to use anecdotes as evidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So can we conclude that you disagree with the title of the thread, and you believe that it's fine to use anecdotes as evidence?

 

I think that is a fair conclution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that is a fair conclution.

 

Fine. Your job is done here. You've told us your position, and you don't really have much more to add to this thread do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fine. Your job is done here. You've told us your position, and you don't really have much more to add to this thread do you?

 

A discussion involves talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.

 

Why do you want the discussion to end?

If it is boring you why not just leave the topic?

 

When my opinion is attacked I surely have the right to defend that opinion.

Edited by Lucy75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When my opinion is attacked I surely have the right to defend that opinion.

 

What would it take for you to change your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I get the impression that everyone that shows you or anyone of your little gang to be wrong, is a troll called (Mr Smith, ivanava, etc).

 

Why is the 'little gang' wrong? Anecdotaly they all believe you to be a multiple user name user. That isn't evidence that you are, but prescribing your own logic. It's overwhelming evidence therefore you should be ascribing to it, not arguing against it.

 

Almost all your posts including those under other user names the same response from other users are the same, are they also anecdotaly wrong evidencially?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What would it take for you to change your opinion?

 

When the courts and scientific community stop using anecdotes as evidence and dismiss them out of hand I would likley change my opinion.

 

---------- Post added 19-03-2015 at 16:09 ----------

 

Why is the 'little gang' wrong? Anecdotaly they all believe you to be a multiple user name user. That isn't evidence that you are, but prescribing your own logic. It's overwhelming evidence therefore you should be ascribing to it, not arguing against it.

 

Almost all your posts including those under other user names the same response from other users are the same, are they also anecdotaly wrong evidencially?

 

In which post did I say that anecdotes are overwhelming evidence.

 

You also appear to be using anecdotal evidence to support a theory that I am someone else, which means you must agree with me that anecdotes are evidence.

Edited by Lucy75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When the courts and scientific community stop using anecdotes as evidence and dismiss them out of hand I would likley change my opinion.

 

So there isn't anything that anyone could say to you that could pursued you that you were wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.