British public wrong about nearly everything?

[Henkeman]

They should do a TV programme about something like that. It'd probably be quite interesting.

On the british public being wrong, or on the psychology of why people get things wrong?

Think both may be interesting. Its in the same ball park as people being afraid of flying, but not driving. Really interesting subject

Woosh ;-)

 

[roaminblue]

They should do a TV programme about something like that. It'd probably be quite interesting.

On the british public being wrong, or on the psychology of why people get things wrong?

Think both may be interesting. Its in the same ball park as people being afraid of flying, but not driving. Really interesting subject

Woosh ;-)

hahaha, I take it there was a television show, then? I really need more of a social life....

 

[Henkeman]

On the british public being wrong, or on the psychology of why people get things wrong?

Think both may be interesting. Its in the same ball park as people being afraid of flying, but not driving. Really interesting subject

Woosh ;-)

hahaha, I take it there was a television show, then? I really need more of a social life....

The last two words in my post were the clue...

 

[roaminblue]

Daniel Kahneman is your man.

Won the Nobel Prize for Economics.

His book Thinking, Fast and Slow demonstrates how irrational humans are, particularly when faced with statistics, figures risk, probability etc.

Yup, great book. Read it a year or so ago, I believe. Did some great work on prospect theory as well!

 

[roaminblue]

Woosh ;-)

hahaha, I take it there was a television show, then? I really need more of a social life....

The last two words in my post were the clue...

aaaah. With you now! hahahaha, slow on the uptake sometimes.

There actually was a panorama episode earlier in the year about this type of thing. I believe it was more focussed on prospect theory...yup, managed to miss that as well

 

[roaminblue]

I think his statistics are flawed.

How can any statistics on the percentage of fraudulent benefit claims be accurate ? If they knew what frauds were going on they would catch them surely ? Perhaps the 70 pence or 0.07% view is based on the amount they know about and attempt to prosecute ?

I remember hearing about or reading a Home Office report a while back, maybe over 10 years ago saying that 33% of British males have criminal records and around 10% of women. I don't know the break-down and what percentage were for offences of dishonesty. However, given that benefit fraud is regarded by those who commit it as a 'victimless crime' then I would be amazed if somebody with a criminal record for dishonesty or even violent assault or sex crimes would baulk at committing benefit fraud.

The 24% view of the public is probably an educated guess from those who see what is going on around them. The 0.07% is probably the academic dreamers' and left-wing nutjobs' views on the matter.

Fraud, you're correct, is inherently hard to measure. However, it is based upon data collected by local authorities and housing authorities, subject to internal validation and quality assurance. This is surely better than an educated guess, isn't it? Even if you don't believe they can reliably measure, and use statistical methods to upscale; at least they have some hard data as a starting point, no?

Anyway, what I found interesting, whether you agree completely with the data or not, is that humans can grossly overestimate situations or facts through the likes of probability neglect. Which actually, is probably what your "educated guess" is an example of.

I also watched the documentary the other day about The Border Control Agency. It was stated quite clearly that they believed there to be around 1 million people living illegally in this country. Now how can that only give rise to a 2% increase in the probable number of recently arrived immigrants ? Also he doesn't give his sources.

Also what sort of a question is that to refer to "recently arrived immigrants " ? What does that mean and how would the British public be expected to differentiate between recently arrived immigrants and those who have been here 30 years ? I regularly encounter immigrants who have been in this country a great many years but who, for various reasons, do not speak fluent English and in some cases not a word of English.

I didn't see the documentary, but by the way you worded it, probably because the 1m people living illegaly haven't recently arrived?

The guy is spouting the usual left-wing bollix and his article doesn't deserve scrutiny.

The article, as I read it anyway, is more about the psychological aspect, rather than the rights or wrongs of immigration etc.

 

[Balti]

just the ''British'' public then no doubt

lol