David Baxter PhD
Late Founder
The Plural of "Anecdote" Is Not "Data"
by Peter A. Ubel, Psychology Today
January 21, 2014
An Embarrasingly Unscientific New York Times Op-Ed on Music and Success
A recent New York Times op-ed by Joanne Lipman poses the question: ?Is music the key to success?? As a serious amateur musician, I have long credited my half-way respectable pianistic accomplishments to the discipline I gained practicing Chopin etudes, and even to the teamwork I developed practicing Beethoven piano trios. In fact, I frequently pull out these arguments when trying to convince my children to practice piano, although once you have to make a ?piano practicing makes you more successful? argument with your children, you know you?ve lost the piano playing battle.
Tired of my own anecdotal arguments, I eagerly read Lipman?s op-ed to find out what scientific evidence would say about the topic. Instead I was greeted with a whole series of anecdotes. Lipman writes: ?Look carefully and you will find musicians at the top of almost any industry.? Then she lists illustrative examples: Woody Allen in the movie industry, Paula Zahn in news casting, Larry Page at Google.
Pretty strong evidence, yes? Not really, when you realize the huge number of successful people in all those industries who don?t have serious musical training. Moreover, imagine an article about sports and success, or high school drama and success?any one of those articles could list all kinds of high achievers in various industries who played high school soccer or performed a leading role in one of their high school plays.
Indeed, if you start interviewing folks about their hobbies, or about what activity they excelled in during high school, I expect all those folks will come up with great explanations for how that hobby or activity made them into the success they are today. Heck, I played sports, practiced music and acted in a play during high school. I could easily tell you a story about how any of those experiences made me into the brilliant, successful and, of course, humble person I am today.
But would any good scientist believe that?
I do not expect op-eds to back up all their claims with scientific evidence. The ?op? in op-ed stands for opinion, after all. But Lipman practically begs us to view her essay through the lens of science. First she poses a question: ?What is it about serious music training that seems to correlate with outside success in other fields??
She follows this question up with a confident claim: ?The connection is not a coincidence. I know because I asked. I put the question to top-flight professionals in industries from tech to finance to media, all of whom had serious (if often little-known) past lives as musicians. Almost all made a connection between their music training and their professional achievements.? Lipman seems to think that the plural of ?anecdote? is ?data.?
Oh my. This is shockingly bad reasoning and stunningly bad science.
by Peter A. Ubel, Psychology Today
January 21, 2014
An Embarrasingly Unscientific New York Times Op-Ed on Music and Success
A recent New York Times op-ed by Joanne Lipman poses the question: ?Is music the key to success?? As a serious amateur musician, I have long credited my half-way respectable pianistic accomplishments to the discipline I gained practicing Chopin etudes, and even to the teamwork I developed practicing Beethoven piano trios. In fact, I frequently pull out these arguments when trying to convince my children to practice piano, although once you have to make a ?piano practicing makes you more successful? argument with your children, you know you?ve lost the piano playing battle.
Tired of my own anecdotal arguments, I eagerly read Lipman?s op-ed to find out what scientific evidence would say about the topic. Instead I was greeted with a whole series of anecdotes. Lipman writes: ?Look carefully and you will find musicians at the top of almost any industry.? Then she lists illustrative examples: Woody Allen in the movie industry, Paula Zahn in news casting, Larry Page at Google.
Pretty strong evidence, yes? Not really, when you realize the huge number of successful people in all those industries who don?t have serious musical training. Moreover, imagine an article about sports and success, or high school drama and success?any one of those articles could list all kinds of high achievers in various industries who played high school soccer or performed a leading role in one of their high school plays.
Indeed, if you start interviewing folks about their hobbies, or about what activity they excelled in during high school, I expect all those folks will come up with great explanations for how that hobby or activity made them into the success they are today. Heck, I played sports, practiced music and acted in a play during high school. I could easily tell you a story about how any of those experiences made me into the brilliant, successful and, of course, humble person I am today.
But would any good scientist believe that?
I do not expect op-eds to back up all their claims with scientific evidence. The ?op? in op-ed stands for opinion, after all. But Lipman practically begs us to view her essay through the lens of science. First she poses a question: ?What is it about serious music training that seems to correlate with outside success in other fields??
She follows this question up with a confident claim: ?The connection is not a coincidence. I know because I asked. I put the question to top-flight professionals in industries from tech to finance to media, all of whom had serious (if often little-known) past lives as musicians. Almost all made a connection between their music training and their professional achievements.? Lipman seems to think that the plural of ?anecdote? is ?data.?
Oh my. This is shockingly bad reasoning and stunningly bad science.
