"implementing statistics" - Mac Hs - Research area that should be funded

What area of research should not be funded and why? <1500 Characters>

Why do we fund research to begin with? A cardinal impulsive force must exist that compels us to do so. Most logically it is our desire to find the truth and produce new knowledge. Any area of research that produces knowledge already obtained or which leads to incomplete or false knowledge is worthless and should not be funded. In all of my experiences this area has been studies chiefly based on statistics. While statistics can prove useful on many occasions it is often misused, misleading and meaningless. There are several methods in which accidentally or for the gain of the perpetrator false information can be produced by implementing statistics. For example, a tooth paste company funds a statistical study to convince buyers that their tooth paste whitens teeth. Coincidentally, 9 out of the 10 people who were surveyed report that indeed the paste did so. This statistic would leave people believing that the paste actually works, when the researchers could have simply selected 10 people with already white teeth. Other such studies conclude that one variable causes the change in another just because a correlation exist between the two. These false statistics, believed by many can be quite detrimental in the quest for the truth and new knowledge. Instead of funding statistical studies such as these the money should be spent on controlled experiments that produce results that are both precise and accurate. Only then could the results be established as the truth and new knowledge.

You have the right idea about false stats, but this part is not quite right. It would not matter if they already had white teeth, because you describe a survey about whether people say the product whitens teeth. A better example would be if you mentions "participant bias" and suggest that they might survey only customers who have expressed satisfaction.

You gave an intelligent answer, but I think you know they are asking for a discussion of a specific area of research, such as the space program. Many people think we should have no space program because children are starving elsewhere in the world...

Others do not like global warming research, stem cell research... the list is long... Google around about controversial research funding.

What you wrote about here is just a desire to pull funding from studies with a weak design. Not only statistics, but many other studies, including experimental studies, can have flawed designs. We are looking for a research topic that should not be funded.

^ yeah... but all those are such cliche answers... I think it's better to be unique.

I'll definitely replace the example with a stronger one. thank you

Yep, that is for sure. I don't mean to suggest that you should choose an overused topic. I just want to make sure you know it is important to choose a specific area of research. Any area of research can have bad statistics.

You might be interested in this book I saw recently: How to Lie with Statistics by Huff (1954).

:-)