Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • I'm going to be talking about statistics today.

    譯者: 易帆 余 審譯者: Wilde Luo

  • If that makes you immediately feel a little bit wary, that's OK,

    今天我要來談談統計。

  • that doesn't make you some kind of crazy conspiracy theorist,

    如果讓你感覺到 一點點的焦慮,沒關係,

  • it makes you skeptical.

    這場演講不會讓你變成 瘋狂的陰謀論者,

  • And when it comes to numbers, especially now, you should be skeptical.

    它能讓你學會懷疑。

  • But you should also be able to tell which numbers are reliable

    一提到數據,特別是現在, 你更要懷疑。

  • and which ones aren't.

    但你也必須要有能力 判讀哪些數據是可靠的,

  • So today I want to try to give you some tools to be able to do that.

    哪些是不可靠的。

  • But before I do,

    所以我今天要教大家 一些判斷的工具。

  • I just want to clarify which numbers I'm talking about here.

    但在這之前,

  • I'm not talking about claims like,

    我想要先說明 我所談論的是哪一種數據。

  • "9 out of 10 women recommend this anti-aging cream."

    我並不是要談類似這樣的數據:

  • I think a lot of us always roll our eyes at numbers like that.

    「十位女性當中有九位 會推薦這款抗老化乳液」

  • What's different now is people are questioning statistics like,

    我們很多人聽到那樣的說法 會不相信而翻眼珠。

  • "The US unemployment rate is five percent."

    但是我現在要談的, 是人們會質疑的一些統計數據,

  • What makes this claim different is it doesn't come from a private company,

    例如「美國的失業率是 5% 」。

  • it comes from the government.

    兩者的差異在於後者這宣稱 (失業率)並非來自私人企業,

  • About 4 out of 10 Americans distrust the economic data

    而是來自政府機構。

  • that gets reported by government.

    實際上,如今每十個美國人當中

  • Among supporters of President Trump it's even higher;

    就有四個人根本不相信 政府公布的經濟數據。

  • it's about 7 out of 10.

    而川普總統的支持者當中, 不相信的比例更高,

  • I don't need to tell anyone here

    大約十個人裡面會有七個。

  • that there are a lot of dividing lines in our society right now,

    我並不想在這裡解釋

  • and a lot of them start to make sense,

    在目前社會中的許多分界線;

  • once you understand people's relationships with these government numbers.

    一旦你了解政府公佈的數據 與民眾之間的關係,

  • On the one hand, there are those who say these statistics are crucial,

    這些分界線就開始變得有意義了。

  • that we need them to make sense of society as a whole

    一方面,有些人認為 這些數據是至關重要的,

  • in order to move beyond emotional anecdotes

    這些數據能讓我們 瞭解整個社會的狀況,

  • and measure progress in an [objective] way.

    為了就是要避免 各種情感上的糾葛,

  • And then there are the others,

    並且以客觀的方式 衡量政策的發展。

  • who say that these statistics are elitist,

    另外一群人則認為,

  • maybe even rigged;

    這些統計數據 都是來自菁英份子,

  • they don't make sense and they don't really reflect

    甚至可能是受到操縱的;

  • what's happening in people's everyday lives.

    這些數據沒有意義, 而且根本無法真正反映

  • It kind of feels like that second group is winning the argument right now.

    一般民眾的日常生活狀況。

  • We're living in a world of alternative facts,

    目前看來,主張第二種觀點的人 似乎是對的。

  • where people don't find statistics this kind of common ground,

    我們生活的世界中 胡說八道已成常態,

  • this starting point for debate.

    民眾對這些數據沒有基本共識,

  • This is a problem.

    也不會把這些數據 視為爭論時的基準點。

  • There are actually moves in the US right now

    這會是個問題。

  • to get rid of some government statistics altogether.

    實際上,目前有一股風潮 正在席捲美國,

  • Right now there's a bill in congress about measuring racial inequality.

    他們認為應該要全面擺脫 政府統計數據的束縛。

  • The draft law says that government money should not be used

    目前國會正在審查一項有關 評估種族不平等的法案。

  • to collect data on racial segregation.

    草案中主張, 政府不應該把經費運用於

  • This is a total disaster.

    收集各種有關種族隔離的資料上。

  • If we don't have this data,

    這簡直是一場災難。

  • how can we observe discrimination,

    如果我們缺乏這樣的資料,

  • let alone fix it?

    我們要如何觀察種族歧視現象?

  • In other words:

    更不用提要如何修正它?

  • How can a government create fair policies

    換句話說:

  • if they can't measure current levels of unfairness?

    如果政府無法衡量 目前不公的程度,

  • This isn't just about discrimination,

    他們要如何制訂公平的政策?

  • it's everything -- think about it.

    這也不只是攸關歧視的問題,

  • How can we legislate on health care

    也會牽扯到所有的事情,各位想想:

  • if we don't have good data on health or poverty?

    如果我們沒有 健康或貧困的正確數據,

  • How can we have public debate about immigration

    我們要如何制訂 衛生保健的相關法案?

  • if we can't at least agree

    如果我們連有多少人正要移入、 遷出我們的國家,

  • on how many people are entering and leaving the country?

    都缺乏一致的共識,

  • Statistics come from the state; that's where they got their name.

    我們要如何對於移民政策 進行公開的辯論?

  • The point was to better measure the population

    統計(Statistics) 這個字, 就是源自於國家事務(State)。

  • in order to better serve it.

    重點是,要更精確地 測量人口的分布,

  • So we need these government numbers,

    才能為社會大眾提供更好的服務。

  • but we also have to move beyond either blindly accepting

    所以我們需要政府的數據,

  • or blindly rejecting them.

    但我們也需要摒除全盤接受

  • We need to learn the skills to be able to spot bad statistics.

    或是全盤否定的迷思。

  • I started to learn some of these

    我們需要學會 辨識劣質統計數據的方法。

  • when I was working in a statistical department

    當我在聯合國的統計部門工作時,

  • that's part of the United Nations.

    我開始學會了一些辨識的技巧。

  • Our job was to find out how many Iraqis had been forced from their homes

    我們的工作是要了解 有多少伊拉克人民

  • as a result of the war,

    因為戰爭而被迫離開家鄉,

  • and what they needed.

    並且了解他們的需求。

  • It was really important work, but it was also incredibly difficult.

    這是很重要的工作, 但也非常困難。

  • Every single day, we were making decisions

    我們每天所作的決策,

  • that affected the accuracy of our numbers --

    都會影響數據的準確性,

  • decisions like which parts of the country we should go to,

    像是我們應該要前往 這個國家的哪些地區、

  • who we should speak to,

    我們要與誰談話、

  • which questions we should ask.

    應該問哪些問題...等等。

  • And I started to feel really disillusioned with our work,

    但我對於工作的幻想 很快就破滅了,

  • because we thought we were doing a really good job,

    因為我們自認這項工作很有意義,

  • but the one group of people who could really tell us were the Iraqis,

    但是能夠告訴我們 真實情況的伊拉克民眾,

  • and they rarely got the chance to find our analysis, let alone question it.

    他們根本沒機會看到我們的分析, 更別說是提出質疑了。

  • So I started to feel really determined

    所以我愈來愈確信,

  • that the one way to make numbers more accurate

    要讓數據更為準確的方法,

  • is to have as many people as possible be able to question them.

    就是盡量讓更多人對數據提出質疑。

  • So I became a data journalist.

    所以我變成一位數據記者。

  • My job is finding these data sets and sharing them with the public.

    我的工作就是找到這些資料, 並且公開分享給社會大眾。

  • Anyone can do this, you don't have to be a geek or a nerd.

    任何人都能做得到, 你不需要是個技術極客或是怪咖。

  • You can ignore those words; they're used by people

    你不用理會這些名詞;

  • trying to say they're smart while pretending they're humble.

    這是某些人想要表現聰明, 卻假裝謙虛時所用的字眼。

  • Absolutely anyone can do this.

    任何人絕對都可以做到。

  • I want to give you guys three questions

    所以我想給各位三個問題,

  • that will help you be able to spot some bad statistics.

    它們可以幫助你辨識出 劣質的統計數據。

  • So, question number one is: Can you see uncertainty?

    問題一: 你是否能看出數據的不確定性?

  • One of things that's really changed people's relationship with numbers,

    有件事真正會改變 民眾與數據的關係,

  • and even their trust in the media,

    甚至改變對媒體的信任,

  • has been the use of political polls.

    其中一個方式就是 對選舉民調的濫用。

  • I personally have a lot of issues with political polls

    我個人對選舉民調的 報導方式很有意見,

  • because I think the role of journalists is actually to report the facts

    因為我認為記者扮演的角色, 就只是報導事實,

  • and not attempt to predict them,

    而不是嘗試著預測結果,

  • especially when those predictions can actually damage democracy

    特別是那些會傷害民主 的選舉預測,

  • by signaling to people: don't bother to vote for that guy,

    像是暗示選民說: 別再費心給那個傢伙投票了,

  • he doesn't have a chance.

    他根本沒機會當選。

  • Let's set that aside for now and talk about the accuracy of this endeavor.

    我們把這個話題擺一邊, 先來談談這樣做的效果如何。

  • Based on national elections in the UK, Italy, Israel

    根據幾個國家的選舉, 像是英國、義大利、以色列,

  • and of course, the most recent US presidential election,

    當然還有最近的美國總統大選,

  • using polls to predict electoral outcomes

    可以看到運用民調來預測選舉結果,

  • is about as accurate as using the moon to predict hospital admissions.

    準確度就像觀測天象來預測 是否應該住院,同樣的不可靠。

  • No, seriously, I used actual data from an academic study to draw this.

    說真的,我用了一份學術研究報告 的真實資料,畫出這張圖。

  • There are a lot of reasons why polling has become so inaccurate.

    民調變得不準確,有很多原因。

  • Our societies have become really diverse,

    我們的社會已經變得相當多元化,

  • which makes it difficult for pollsters to get a really nice representative sample

    讓從事民意調查的人很難挑選出

  • of the population for their polls.

    真正能代表選民意願的樣本。

  • People are really reluctant to answer their phones to pollsters,

    人們已經很厭倦回答民調電話,

  • and also, shockingly enough, people might lie.

    而且令人震驚的是, 受訪者還可能會說謊。

  • But you wouldn't necessarily know that to look at the media.

    但是你在媒體報導中 不會知道這些事情。

  • For one thing, the probability of a Hillary Clinton win

    例如希拉蕊·柯林頓 贏得選舉的機率,

  • was communicated with decimal places.

    竟然可以精確到小數點?

  • We don't use decimal places to describe the temperature.

    我們描述氣溫都不會這麽精確。

  • How on earth can predicting the behavior of 230 million voters in this country

    所以怎麼可能對於全國 二億三千萬選民的行為,

  • be that precise?

    能夠做出如此精確的預測?

  • And then there were those sleek charts.

    還有一些看似井然有條的圖表,

  • See, a lot of data visualizations will overstate certainty, and it works --

    各位知道嗎,有許多的視覺化設計,

  • these charts can numb our brains to criticism.

    會誇大資料的準確性,而且很有效。

  • When you hear a statistic, you might feel skeptical.

    這些圖表會麻痺我們的大腦, 讓我們無法做出判斷。

  • As soon as it's buried in a chart,

    當你聽到一個統計數據, 你可能會覺得懷疑。

  • it feels like some kind of objective science,

    但是當數據變成了圖表,

  • and it's not.

    看起來就成為客觀的科學調查結果,

  • So I was trying to find ways to better communicate this to people,

    但實際上並非如此。

  • to show people the uncertainty in our numbers.

    所以,我試著找出一些方法, 清楚地告訴大家這些事,

  • What I did was I started taking real data sets,

    讓大家知道數據本身的不確定性。

  • and turning them into hand-drawn visualizations,

    而我所做的,就是把這些數據

  • so that people can see how imprecise the data is;

    用手繪的視覺化設計來呈現,

  • so people can see that a human did this,

    好讓人們可以看到 資料是如此的不精確;

  • a human found the data and visualized it.

    所以大家會看到, 有人作了這個調查,

  • For example, instead of finding out the probability

    然後有人找到這些數據, 並且將它視覺化。

  • of getting the flu in any given month,

    舉個例子,

  • you can see the rough distribution of flu season.

    我們不去找出每個月 民眾患流行性感冒的機率,

  • This is --

    而是得到整個流感季節 的大致分布情形。

  • (Laughter)

    就是這一張圖。

  • a bad shot to show in February.

    (笑聲)

  • But it's also more responsible data visualization,

    正值二月,這數據真不適時宜。

  • because if you were to show the exact probabilities,

    但這樣的視覺化呈現方式 是比較可靠的,

  • maybe that would encourage people to get their flu jabs

    因為如果你是用精確的機率來呈現,

  • at the wrong time.

    也許會誤導民眾

  • The point of these shaky lines

    在錯誤的時間注射疫苗。

  • is so that people remember these imprecisions,

    重點是這些歪七扭八的線條,

  • but also so they don't necessarily walk away with a specific number,

    能讓人們記得「數據的不精確性」,

  • but they can remember important facts.

    人們不應該滿足於 一個鷄肋的數字,

  • Facts like injustice and inequality leave a huge mark on our lives.

    而是要能夠記得重要的事實。

  • Facts like Black Americans and Native Americans have shorter life expectancies

    有些不正義和不公平的事實, 在我們生活中造成了巨大的影響。

  • than those of other races,

    像是美國黑人及原住民的預期壽命

  • and that isn't changing anytime soon.

    比其他族群來的短,

  • Facts like prisoners in the US can be kept in solitary confinement cells

    而且這是短時間內難以改變的事實。

  • that are smaller than the size of an average parking space.

    還有像是美國監獄中, 囚犯的個人牢房空間

  • The point of these visualizations is also to remind people

    比一般停車位的平均面積 還要小的事實。

  • of some really important statistical concepts,

    這些視覺化圖像的重點 就是為了要提醒大家,

  • concepts like averages.

    關注一些真正重要的統計概念,

  • So let's say you hear a claim like,

    像是關於「平均數」的概念。

  • "The average swimming pool in the US contains 6.23 fecal accidents."

    例如你聽到有人說:

  • That doesn't mean every single swimming pool in the country

    「在美國,每座游泳池裡面 平均有 6.23 次大便」。

  • contains exactly 6.23 turds.

    它的意思不是說,每一座游泳池

  • So in order to show that,

    都有剛剛好 6.23 次大便。

  • I went back to the original data, which comes from the CDC,

    為了說明這件事,

  • who surveyed 47 swimming facilities.

    我找到疾病管制局的原始資料,

  • And I just spent one evening redistributing poop.

    他們總共調查了47 座游泳池。

  • So you can kind of see how misleading averages can be.

    我花了一個晚上「重新分配大便」。

  • (Laughter)

    所以你就可以看出, 平均數如何地誤導大家。

  • OK, so the second question that you guys should be asking yourselves

    (笑聲)

  • to spot bad numbers is:

    好,第二個辨識 劣質統計數據的方法,

  • Can I see myself in the data?

    就是你要問自己:

  • This question is also about averages in a way,

    我自己的情況體現在這份數據內嗎?

  • because part of the reason why people are so frustrated

    這個問題也與平均數有關,

  • with these national statistics,

    因為民眾會對於國家的統計數據

  • is they don't really tell the story of who's winning and who's losing

    產生失望的一部份原因,

  • from national policy.

    是因為在國家的政策中,

  • It's easy to understand why people are frustrated with global averages

    他們無法完全地看出 誰是贏家、誰是輸家。

  • when they don't match up with their personal experiences.

    很容易理解, 為什麼當全球的平均數字

  • I wanted to show people the way data relates to their everyday lives.

    與民眾的個人經驗不一致時, 他們會感到失望不已。

  • I started this advice column called "Dear Mona,"

    我想告訴人們與我們 日常生活相關的數據。

  • where people would write to me with questions and concerns

    我開設了一個專欄《親愛的夢娜》,

  • and I'd try to answer them with data.

    人們會寫信詢問一些 他們所關心的事情,

  • People asked me anything.

    我會試著用數據回答他們。

  • questions like, "Is it normal to sleep in a separate bed to my wife?"

    人們會問我任何事情,

  • "Do people regret their tattoos?"

    像是「跟老婆分床睡是正常的嗎?」

  • "What does it mean to die of natural causes?"

    「人們會對身上的刺青覺得後悔嗎?」

  • All of these questions are great, because they make you think

    「自然死亡」是甚麼意思?

  • about ways to find and communicate these numbers.

    所有的問題都很棒, 因為這些問題會讓你思考,

  • If someone asks you, "How much pee is a lot of pee?"

    用什麼方法尋找並傳達這些數字。

  • which is a question that I got asked,

    如果有人問你,「尿多少尿才算太多?」

  • you really want to make sure that the visualization makes sense

    我真的曾經被問過這個問題,

  • to as many people as possible.

    你會很想用視覺化圖像來表達,

  • These numbers aren't unavailable.

    這樣可以盡量讓更多人理解。

  • Sometimes they're just buried in the appendix of an academic study.

    這些數字不是找不到。

  • And they're certainly not inscrutable;

    有時候,數據只是被埋沒在 學術研究的附錄裡。

  • if you really wanted to test these numbers on urination volume,

    但是它們並非難以理解的;

  • you could grab a bottle and try it for yourself.

    如果你真的想要檢驗 這些有關尿量的數據,

  • (Laughter)

    你自己拿個瓶子試試就知道了。

  • The point of this isn't necessarily

    (笑聲)

  • that every single data set has to relate specifically to you.

    重點是,這些數據

  • I'm interested in how many women were issued fines in France

    並不是每樣都要與你有關。

  • for wearing the face veil, or the niqab,

    我對於「法國有多少女人 因為戴面紗與頭巾而被罰款」

  • even if I don't live in France or wear the face veil.

    這樣的議題很感興趣,

  • The point of asking where you fit in is to get as much context as possible.

    即使我不住法國也不戴面紗。

  • So it's about zooming out from one data point,

    問自己是否符合數據當中的情況, 是為了儘量得到更多的事件脈絡。

  • like the unemployment rate is five percent,

    所以我們要更宏觀地觀察數據,

  • and seeing how it changes over time,

    像是失業率 5% 這類的數據,

  • or seeing how it changes by educational status --

    可以觀察它如何隨著時間而變化,

  • this is why your parents always wanted you to go to college --

    或看看它在不同教育程度的差異──

  • or seeing how it varies by gender.

    這也許是爸媽希望你進大學的原因──

  • Nowadays, male unemployment rate is higher

    或是看它在不同性別上的表現。

  • than the female unemployment rate.

    如今,男性的失業率

  • Up until the early '80s, it was the other way around.

    已經比女性高了。

  • This is a story of one of the biggest changes

    但是在 80 年代初期之前, 情況是相反的。

  • that's happened in American society,

    這是美國社會到目前為止,

  • and it's all there in that chart, once you look beyond the averages.

    其中一項最大的改變,

  • The axes are everything;

    一旦你眼光放遠,不被平均數字侷限, 這些訊息都存在圖表當中。

  • once you change the scale, you can change the story.

    軸線能呈現數據的各種意義;

  • OK, so the third and final question that I want you guys to think about

    當你改變觀察的尺度, 你就能得到新的結論。

  • when you're looking at statistics is:

    好,第三個也是最後一個問題,

  • How was the data collected?

    當你觀察統計數據時 我希望各位去思考的是:

  • So far, I've only talked about the way data is communicated,

    這些數據是如何收集而來的?

  • but the way it's collected matters just as much.

    目前為止,我只談論到 呈現數據的方式,

  • I know this is tough,

    但收集資料的方式也同樣重要。

  • because methodologies can be opaque and actually kind of boring,

    我知道這很困難,

  • but there are some simple steps you can take to check this.

    因為收集數據的方法, 經常是不透明而且有些無聊的,

  • I'll use one last example here.

    但有一些步驟 可以給各位用來檢視數據。

  • One poll found that 41 percent of Muslims in this country support jihad,

    這裡我要舉最後一個例子。

  • which is obviously pretty scary,

    一份民調指出,國內有 41% 的 穆斯林支持伊斯蘭聖戰,

  • and it was reported everywhere in 2015.

    聽起來相當嚇人,

  • When I want to check a number like that,

    這份調查在 2015 年被大肆報導。

  • I'll start off by finding the original questionnaire.

    當我想檢驗這樣的數據時,

  • It turns out that journalists who reported on that statistic

    我會先尋找原始的問卷。

  • ignored a question lower down on the survey

    結果發現,報導這則新聞的記者,

  • that asked respondents how they defined "jihad."

    忽略了問卷當中的一個問題,

  • And most of them defined it as,

    題目中詢問了受訪者 「如何定義伊斯蘭聖戰?」

  • "Muslims' personal, peaceful struggle to be more religious."

    大多數人的定義是:

  • Only 16 percent defined it as, "violent holy war against unbelievers."

    「為了更虔誠的信仰,穆斯林所進行 個人的、和平的內心鬥爭」。

  • This is the really important point:

    只有 16% 的人認為是 「對抗不信教者的暴力神聖戰爭」。

  • based on those numbers, it's totally possible

    所以真正的重點是:

  • that no one in the survey who defined it as violent holy war

    根據原本的數據,很有可能

  • also said they support it.

    那些將聖戰 定義為暴力神聖戰爭的人,

  • Those two groups might not overlap at all.

    根本不支持聖戰。

  • It's also worth asking how the survey was carried out.

    這兩群人可能沒有根本重疊。

  • This was something called an opt-in poll,

    問卷調查的進行方式 也值得我們探討。

  • which means anyone could have found it on the internet and completed it.

    這次的民調是一種稱為 「自願參與」的調查方式,

  • There's no way of knowing if those people even identified as Muslim.

    意思就是,任何人都可以上網 找到並且參與這項調查。

  • And finally, there were 600 respondents in that poll.

    你沒有辦法得知參與者 是否真的是穆斯林。

  • There are roughly three million Muslims in this country,

    而且最後只有 600 個人 參與了那份民調。

  • according to Pew Research Center.

    根據皮尤研究中心的資料,

  • That means the poll spoke to roughly one in every 5,000 Muslims

    我們國內大約有三百萬名 伊斯蘭教信徒。

  • in this country.

    意思就是國內每五千名穆斯林當中,

  • This is one of the reasons

    大約只有一位填寫了那份問卷。

  • why government statistics are often better than private statistics.

    這也是為什麼政府的統計數據,

  • A poll might speak to a couple hundred people, maybe a thousand,

    通常比私人機構的調查 更為準確的原因之一。

  • or if you're L'Oreal, trying to sell skin care products in 2005,

    一項民調可能訪談了幾百或一千人,

  • then you spoke to 48 women to claim that they work.

    或者以萊雅公司在 2005 年 嘗試銷售護膚產品為例,

  • (Laughter)

    只訪談了 48 位 認為產品有效的女性就好了。

  • Private companies don't have a huge interest in getting the numbers right,

    (笑聲)

  • they just need the right numbers.

    私人公司沒多少興趣 去追求數據的正確性,

  • Government statisticians aren't like that.

    他們只需要「對」的數字。

  • In theory, at least, they're totally impartial,

    但是政府的統計人員可不能如此。

  • not least because most of them do their jobs regardless of who's in power.

    至少在理論上,他們必須完全公正,

  • They're civil servants.

    特別是因為他們大多數都很盡職, 不受掌權者所影響。

  • And to do their jobs properly,

    他們都是人民的公僕。

  • they don't just speak to a couple hundred people.

    而為了做好份內的事,

  • Those unemployment numbers I keep on referencing

    他們不能只調查幾百人。

  • come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics,

    我所引用的失業率數字

  • and to make their estimates,

    來自美國勞動統計局,

  • they speak to over 140,000 businesses in this country.

    為了這項估計,

  • I get it, it's frustrating.

    他們調查超過 14 萬家國內企業。

  • If you want to test a statistic that comes from a private company,

    我懂,聽到這些很令人沮喪。

  • you can buy the face cream for you and a bunch of friends, test it out,

    如果你想檢驗私人企業的 統計數據是否正確,

  • if it doesn't work, you can say the numbers were wrong.

    你可以替自己或其他朋友 買面霜來試用,

  • But how do you question government statistics?

    如果覺得沒有效果, 你就可以說他們的數據有誤。

  • You just keep checking everything.

    但是你要如何 對政府的統計數據提出質疑呢?

  • Find out how they collected the numbers.

    你需要檢查這些數據的方方面面。

  • Find out if you're seeing everything on the chart you need to see.

    找出他們是如何收集這些數據的。

  • But don't give up on the numbers altogether, because if you do,

    找出圖表中是否有你需要的全部訊息。

  • we'll be making public policy decisions in the dark,

    但是也不要完全放棄數據, 因為如果你放棄了,

  • using nothing but private interests to guide us.

    我們就會受私人利益的誤導,

  • Thank you.

    在無知的狀態下, 制訂出錯誤的公共政策。

  • (Applause)

    謝謝各位。

I'm going to be talking about statistics today.

譯者: 易帆 余 審譯者: Wilde Luo

字幕與單字

單字即點即查 點擊單字可以查詢單字解釋

B1 中級 中文 美國腔 TED 數據 統計 民調 民眾 調查

【TED】莫娜-查拉比:發現不良統計的3種方法(3種發現不良統計的方法|莫娜-查拉比)。 (【TED】Mona Chalabi: 3 ways to spot a bad statistic (3 ways to spot a bad statistic | Mona Chalabi))

  • 32 6
    Zenn 發佈於 2021 年 01 月 14 日
影片單字