- Hardcover: 304 pages
- Publisher: Little, Brown and Company; 1 edition (June 10, 2010)
- Language: English
- ISBN-10: 0316023787
- ISBN-13: 978-0316023788
- Product Dimensions: 6.5 x 1 x 9.5 inches
- Shipping Weight: 1.1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
- Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (51 customer reviews)
- Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #780,248 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Wrong: Why experts* keep failing us--and how to know when not to trust them *Scientists, finance wizards, doctors, relationship gurus, celebrity CEOs, ... consultants, health officials and more Hardcover – June 10, 2010
Featured Springer resources in biomedicine
Explore these featured titles in biomedicine. Learn more
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
From Publishers Weekly
Freedman (coauthor of A Perfect Mess) makes the case that scientists, finance wizards, relationship gurus, health researchers, and other supposed authorities are as likely to be wrong as right. Drawing from personal interviews with experts on experts, he leads the reader on a merry chase down the road of skepticism, uncovering conflicting solutions to how to sleep better, lose weight, avoid heart attacks, build a financial nest egg, lower cholesterol, etc. In accessible language, Freedman explains the flaws that all too easily worm their way into research, including deliberate fudging of data and downright fraud. Fellow journalists, more interested in flashy copy than accuracy, come in for their share of the blame. Google and other Internet search engines add to the problem, sending unfounded facts to millions of computer users. Fortunately, after pulling the rug from under the reader's feet on every imaginable topic—from the relationship of body fat to dementia, the effect of Tylenol on dogs, and how to prevent inflation, Freedman provides 11 never-fail rules for not being misled—but of course, he admits, he could be wrong. (June)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to the Paperback edition.
"An exposé of the multiple ways that society's so-called experts let us down, if not outright betray us. It's a chunk of spicy populist outrage, and it can be a hoot....It's news you can use."―Dwight Garner, New York Times
We are, as Mr. Freedman puts it, living in an age of "punctuated wrongness," usually misled, occasionally enlightened. His goal is a broad account of this phenomenon, how it takes shape through specific problems in measurement, how it spreads through the general idiocy of crowds, and how we might identify and avoid it. Bravo!...[Mr. Freedman] turns to the right kind of experts to articulate general principles-biostatisticians, for example, who can see deeper than the average scientist into the way the data are gathered, analyzed and screwed up...What makes Wrong so right-it being as good as any general account of the fragility of what we take as expert knowledge-is that it raises the right questions."―Trevor Butterworth, Wall Street Journal
"Mind-bending...[A] compelling case that the majority of people frequently recognized as experts...base their findings on flawed information more often than not....readers of Freedman's evidence might mitigate their unwarranted trust in the "experts" who so often offer sound bites on the morning television news-entertainment programs as well as the "experts" promoted by Oprah, Dr. Phil and others of that ilk."―Steve Weinberg, St. Louis Post-Dispatch
"Forcefully argued, focusing on the point where error shades into deceit...Wrong makes a powerful case for the prevalence of scientific ineptitude."
―Michael Washburn, Washington Post
"This is by far one of the most interesting non-fiction books to have come out in recent times. David H. Freedman reveals why and how a lot-if not all-expert advice is either misleading, manipulated as to mislead, or just plain wrong. Freedman, a journalist by profession, pierces through the shell of intellectual confidence in studies-scientific or otherwise-and exposes 'expert advice', 'studies reveal' and 'survey says' as false catch-phrases designed to fool people into believing that we humans know more about the world around us than we actually do."―Amir Hafizi, The Malay Mail
"A revealing look at the fallibility of "experts," and tips on how to glean facts from the mass of published misinformation...Informative and engaging, if not groundbreaking news to more cynical readers."―Kirkus Reviews
If you are a seller for this product, would you like to suggest updates through seller support?
Top Customer Reviews
The book is Freedman's investigation and exploration of the reasons behind the why these studies are wrong. The book takes the reader on a systematic investigation of the forces that lead to the publication of inaccurate studies from the need to simplify study finding, the bias of publishing only positive findings, to the social pressures that suppress whistleblowers. Freedman paints a comprehensive picture of the weakeness of the scientific research, including research conducted by Nobel Laureates.
Freedman also takes a look at business research and business books which suffer from these same weaknesses and biases. He points out the structural weakness of the two major basis of business books - that today's `winners' offer immutable lessons for everyone else, or that companies need radical new approaches to address new issues. That discussion, in Chapter 6, should be required reading for every business guru and person offering advice. Readers should also go back to Clayton Christensen's HBR article Why Hard-Nosed Executives Should Care About Management Theory that was published in September 2003 to round out their understanding of business research.
Freedman provides practical advice on characteristics of different types of advice. Below is a summary of the statements to give you an idea of how comprehensive the book is, each point is discussed in detail in the last chapter and this cements the value of the book for a researcher or those who make decisions based on research.
Characteristics of less trustworthy advice include:
- Advice that is simplistic, universal, and definitive
- Advice that is supported by only a single study, or many small or less careful ones, or animal studies.
- Advice that is groundbreaking
- Advice that is pushed by people or organizations that stands to benefit from its acceptance.
- Advice that is geared to preventing future occurrences of a prominent recent failure or crisis.
Characteristics of expert advice we should ignore:
- Advice that is mildly resonant
- Advice that is provocative
- Advice that gets a lot of positive attention
- Advice that other experts embrace
- Advice that appears in a prestigious journal
- Advice that is supported by a big, rigorous study
- Advice backed by experts that boast impressive credentials
Characteristics of more trustworthy expert advice
- Advice that does not trip other alarms
- Advice that is a negative finding
- Advice that is heavy on qualifying statements
- Advice that is candid about reputational evidence
- Advice tat provide some context for research
- Advice that provides perspective
- Advice that includes candid, blunt comments
There are to many points here to repeat in this review, but this is the most valuable part of the book and one of the reasons I am recommending the book - particularly for those who engage in research or are making decisions based on research they either commission or review.
Wrong offers a comprehensive view of different types of studies from medical, business, public policy, etc. This gives the book broad appeal and the careful reader insight into the overall modern research process.
The discussion on the wisdom of crowds (Chapter 4 - the Idiocy of Crowds) is perhaps one of the better responses to the current craze of social media. This book is definitely worth the read.
The book offers numerous examples, predominantly of medical studies, which the reader can remember hearing about. The South Korean scientist cloning human stem cells, the debate about the connection between red wine and health are among the flawed science and study Mr. Freedman uses to support his analysis.
The book is blunt and direct and the author calls out people by name and points out the weakeness of their past work.
The author gives you direct references to other skeptical scientists and people who have the job of verifying studies and assuring the quality of research. This has led me to their work, something I never would have found on my own.
This book is not for everyone and while its premise, that many scientific studies are based on poor research, biased, or just plan wrong will have popular appear, the book is not own written for the mainstream. People who do research or make decisions based on research or give advice will get the most out of this book. That is something I do and I found the book very powerful.
The book occasionally drifts into areas and alleys that seem to be more for the author's benefit than the readers. The middle chapters particularly go into detail on things that I did not find particularly interesting. This required me to work my way through chapters five, seven and eight which I found a bit heavy and indirect.
The book has a strong bias and purpose in pointing out the weaknesses and outright failures of research and the research process. The readers have to remind themselves that this is a book about an issue rather than research on the research process. If you know the bias, then you can get a lot out of this book.
A common complaint is that Freedman stays focused on what researchers are doing wrong and fails to report anything they're doing right. The name of the book is "Wrong." We should tailor our expectations accordingly.
David Freedman, contributing editor of Inc., and an accomplished science and business journalist, has addressed the issue in a style that is readable and non-technical. The book is thorough in exploration of research dilemmas and also has an overarching summary foundation and backdrop. Freedman provides this in four appendices at the end of the book's content. These appendices provide valuable information, including one that provides a historical development of research and account of important discoveries, prominent scientists and the culture and time period in which the discoveries occurred. Freedman invites critique of his own writing and thesis. In the last appendix, he asks the question, "Is this book wrong?", addressing the issue that what if he has just written and expounded upon is also just another example of an expert who spins and provides false information. Freedman's openness invites the reader to probe the issues he presents and is quite effective. In addition, he provides his own personal examples of internet searches and outcomes that are representative models of the issues involved in the book. Finally, Freedman's work is impressive in that he cites numerous academics and researchers who comment on the issue he is exploring through the many countless interviews he personally conducted.
There are many divergent ways Freedman could have evolved the direction of his book. What are the underlying causes for such difficulty in determining what is credible evidence and what is not? Freedman could have evolved further into the social-psychological realm by exploring such concepts as the self-serving bias or the fundamental attribution error. While hinting at some of these issues, he also could have explored the field of heuristics and decision-making, whereby humans automatically make the same types of errors over and over again. While he discusses autism, I was also looking for the prominent story of the false research of Andrew Wakefield, who reported that immunization shots were a causative factor in autism. The discredited and false research still has many parents fearful to take their children to get immunization shots.
Freedman does an adequate job in discussing the main types of research, including the most highly regarded and gold standard of the randomized control group design. He might have possibly explored the concept of the placebo studies a little more carefully to elucidate the importance of this design, but he adequately addresses the pros and cons of what is considered the most important design representing the scientific method. While he talks about the randomized control and group designs, he does not reference the ongoing argument amongst researchers with the comparison of the group design and the advocates of the single-subject research design (SSRD). This important research argument still exists today. Can we generalize research findings if we use SSRD and systematically study one individual (with replication of the findings) under very controlled research with ongoing measurements of variables? Such research has been used by the behaviorists, including the operative conditioning method that emerged from B. F. Skinner. (Skinner used primarily pigeons and he kept them at 70% of their body weight so that they would perform for reinforcers of food). The issue also has historical precedence in that 19th century French physiologist Claude Bernard was well known for his discoveries in medicine. Bernard is considered one of the originators of biochemistry, and is credited with discovering the vasomotor system; the action
of curare, carbon monoxide, and other poisons; the functions of the pancreas in digestion; and the glycogenic function of the liver. Bernard's precise research was performed on one subject at a time--and he used sheep. (Freedman does not note Claude Bernard's research significance in his historical appendix 4).
The importance of what is measured and how it is measured is emphasized by Freedman, but possibly not enough. As Freedman notes, the research or inadequate results are often determined by what the researchers choose to measure and for how long they choose to measure it. This is why a single-subject research design emerges as a positive alternative with its issue of ongoing measurement over a longer period of time. The design may offer the distinction from what applied practitioners or clinicians realize - that is there is a big difference between clinical significance and statistical significance.
Still, overall Freedman is a writer whose credentials and experience offer him to be one of the best persons to address the practical matter of making sense of scientific research, media reports, and the problems of making meaningful comparisons. His final chapter, which directs itself into the required public demand to summarize, gives tips and recommendations to us, and is well organized with clarifying subtitles. These include the characteristics of researchers and findings that should give us doubt and/or confidence. Overall, this topic should get far more attention than it does. Freedman has been instrumental in giving this important issue a good start.
Jay Slosar, Ph.D.
Author: The Culture of Excess