Educational Research - the Ethics and Aesthetics of Statistics

More documents

Recommendations

Info

66 N. Grube 5.4 The Suggestive Aesthetics of Charts: The Clearness of Social Coherence or Camps, the Security of Prediction Due to Reliable Observation and Permanent Comparison In Section 5.5, I will focus on some statistical charts in order to analyse how pollsters try to create a new dualistic national narrative that aims to unify the nation. I will focus on some techniques of questioning and on the presentation of data. The translation of analyses of opinion formation into numerical data (Manhardt, 2008; Keller, 2001) suggested non-scrutinised evidence and often divided the population into two contrary camps. Since the late 1940s, pollsters have observed the process of democratisation of Germany. To this end they created questions that divided the population into two parts: one part that was ready for democracy and the other part that was not prepared to participate in political decisions. This division often becomes manifest in questions that contain short pseudo-dialogues. Let us consider examples of questions pertaining to the values of freedom and equality. Two contrary opinions are presented in two silhouettes. One says, ‘I think that freedom and equality are equally important. But if I had to choose between the two, I would consider personal freedom more important, that is, for people to be able to live in freedom and not to be restricted in their personal development’. The other says, ‘Certainly both freedom and equality are important. But if I had to choose between the two, I would consider as much equality as possible to be more important, that is, for no one to be underprivileged and for class differences not to be so strong’ (Noelle- Neumann, 1995, p. 33, 1998, p. 331). The respondents have to rate themselves in accordance with one of these two statements. Differentiated opinions or precise definitions of the two terms freedom and equality are not presented. Another example of this dualistic approach to questioning demands that the respondent decide if he or she is in favour of authoritative or parliamentary government (Noelle-Neumann, 1995, p. 28). Other dichotomic questions forge the respondents to confess their happiness or their sorrows about German unification. In another case the respondents have to come out in favour of democracy or of a different form of government. These divisions indicate that only a selected portion of citizens is authorised to participate, whereas the remainder has to obey and adapt to governmental guidelines or prevalent social norms. The complexity of political attitudes is reduced to questions that evoke dualistic answers: ‘Yes’ or ‘No’, ‘Agree’ versus ‘Not agree’. For example, the Allensbach pollsters judged responses to the questions ‘Do you think most people can be trusted’ and ‘Are you for or against capital punishment’ as indicators for democratic capabilities in the era of the Cold War and German unification (Noelle-Neumann, 1995, pp. 38, 39). Both questions construed two artificial camps (Fig. 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3): The democratic camp is the one that rejects the death penalty and trusts most people. The other mistrustful part endorses the death penalty and seems to be unprepared for democracy – it favours authoritarian forms of government. This division of the confused post-war Germans into two clear groups suggests the possibility of rational, efficient and successful government of the people as a whole. This is because these charts and numbers eliminate social diversity by merging
5 Constructing Social Unity and Presenting Clear Predictions 67 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 83 55 53 51 54 45 39 32 35 36 28 26 13 1953 1964 1967 1972 1976 1981 2005 Can Trust Cannot trust Fig. 5.1 Mistrustful Germans = undemocratic Germans? ‘Do you think that most people can be trusted?’ 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1950 1952 55 55 30 28 54 26 51 50 28 31 53 46 43 33 1960 1961 1967 1971 1972 1973 46 30 1975 For 49 35 42 36 Against 44 39 30 Fig. 5.2 ‘Are you, on principle, for or against capital punishment?’ 51 59 24 1976 1977 1979 1983 1986 1992 1995 1996 57 56 22 24 53 45 35 30 2000 53 23 different opinions and attitudes into two camps. At the same time these data series seem to guarantee a future in which mass democracy can be observed, controlled, and formed. But this simplification of public affairs and communication does not improve public participation in the sense put forward by Dewey. It should be noted that even the Allensbach pollsters doubted if this dichotomy correctly represents the complexity of opinion formation. Therefore, for a long time they preferred so-called open questions because the answers to closed questions are ‘directly impregnated with the atmosphere of the interrogation’. 4 Up until the middle of the 1950s, many reports by the Allensbach Institute contain a collection
Page 2 and 3:
Educational Research: The Ethics an
Page 4 and 5:
Paul Smeyers · Marc Depaepe Editor
Page 6:
Earlier Volumes in this Series Educ
Page 9:
viii Contents 10 The Good, the Beau
Page 12 and 13:
2 P. Smeyers and M. Depaepe their a
Page 14 and 15:
4 P. Smeyers and M. Depaepe more fo
Page 16 and 17:
6 P. Smeyers and M. Depaepe The cha
Page 18 and 19:
8 P. Smeyers and M. Depaepe concern
Page 20 and 21:
10 P. Smeyers and M. Depaepe appear
Page 23 and 24:
Chapter 2 The Lure of Statistics fo
Page 25 and 26: 2 The Lure of Statistics for Educat
Page 35: 2 The Lure of Statistics for Educat
Page 38 and 39: 28 M. Depaepe of the Leuven Catholi
Page 40 and 41: 30 M. Depaepe Tan’s final verdict
Page 42 and 43: 32 M. Depaepe of methodological bot
Page 44 and 45: 34 M. Depaepe tapping other sources
Page 46 and 47: 36 M. Depaepe In the context of dem
Page 48 and 49: 38 M. Depaepe combination. Moreover
Page 50 and 51: 40 M. Depaepe 4. See Pelleriaux (19
Page 52 and 53: 42 M. Depaepe Schneider, J. (2010).
Page 54 and 55: 44 J.J.H. Dekker (see Section 4.4).
Page 56 and 57: 46 J.J.H. Dekker from their own par
Page 58 and 59: 48 J.J.H. Dekker a cohort study tha
Page 60 and 61: 50 J.J.H. Dekker child” (Van IJze
Page 62 and 63: 52 J.J.H. Dekker USA resulted in ev
Page 64 and 65: 54 J.J.H. Dekker of the problem”.
Page 66 and 67: 56 J.J.H. Dekker Dekker. J. J. H.,
Page 69 and 70: Chapter 5 Constructing Social Unity
Page 71 and 72: 5 Constructing Social Unity and Pre
Page 75: 5 Constructing Social Unity and Pre
Page 89 and 90: Chapter 6 n = 1: The Science and Ar
Page 91 and 92: 6 n = 1: The Science and Art of the
Page 107 and 108: Chapter 7 To Frame the Unframable:
Page 109 and 110: 7 To Frame the Unframable: Quantify
Page 125 and 126: Chapter 8 European Citizenship and
Page 127 and 128:
8 European Citizenship and Evidence
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137:
Page 140 and 141:
130 U. Stadler-Altmann and E. Keine
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
146 J.P. Van Bendegem et al. quite
Page 158 and 159:
148 J.P. Van Bendegem et al. expres
Page 160 and 161:
150 J.P. Van Bendegem et al. This i
Page 162 and 163:
152 J.P. Van Bendegem et al. A good
Page 164 and 165:
154 J.P. Van Bendegem et al. Day wi
Page 166 and 167:
156 J.P. Van Bendegem et al. statis
Page 168 and 169:
158 J.P. Van Bendegem et al. 10.4 C
Page 170 and 171:
160 J.P. Van Bendegem et al. Van Be
Page 172 and 173:
162 P. Smeyers to be told. Moreover
Page 174 and 175:
164 P. Smeyers us’. It goes witho
Page 176 and 177:
166 P. Smeyers at the basis of the
Page 178 and 179:
168 P. Smeyers indeterminism, as we
Page 180 and 181:
170 P. Smeyers are steps (a plan as
Page 182 and 183:
172 P. Smeyers to the simple fact t
Page 184 and 185:
174 P. Smeyers 6. The role of the a
Page 186 and 187:
176 P. Smeyers conditions. It is in
Page 188 and 189:
178 I. Munday etc. on a PowerPoint
Page 190 and 191:
180 I. Munday To show how Derrida p
Page 192 and 193:
182 I. Munday might talk of 20 bags
Page 194 and 195:
184 I. Munday is unclear whether th
Page 196 and 197:
186 I. Munday in numerals. This mig
Page 198 and 199:
188 I. Munday We might also note th
Page 200 and 201:
190 R. Smith ‘Statisticism’, on
Page 202 and 203:
192 R. Smith identify, and twice in
Page 204 and 205:
194 R. Smith of the final sentence
Page 206 and 207:
196 R. Smith between admitting that
Page 208 and 209:
198 R. Smith 7 www.equalitytrust.or
Page 210 and 211:
200 R. Smith It is an interesting q
Page 212 and 213:
202 R. Smith self-esteem, happiness
Page 214 and 215:
204 R. Smith Reeves, R. (2009, Apri
Page 216 and 217:
206 P. Standish Some students’ no
Page 218 and 219:
208 P. Standish abstract ratio, wit
Page 220 and 221:
210 P. Standish Rice $1.73 1 / 2 Mo
Page 222 and 223:
212 P. Standish research none of us
Page 224 and 225:
214 P. Standish of the products but
Page 226 and 227:
216 About the Authors co-editor-in-
Page 228 and 229:
218 About the Authors voor Wetensch
Page 230 and 231:
220 Author Index Elkins, G. R., 190
Page 232 and 233:
222 Author Index Silverman, J. G.,
Page 234:
224 Subject Index I Inequality, 29-
show all

Educational Research - the Ethics and Aesthetics of Statistics

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?