If you're speaking of the study I think you are, it was more about "scientists" creating small-sample studies to find correlations that would generate viral headlines (and funding), usually to do with food, and the extent to which researchers would trip over themselves to make such a connection.
It shouldn't be used so broadly to discredit anything one doesn't like. The study referenced earlier was based on millions of pre-existing traffic stops which couldn't be massaged to the will of the person conducting the studies, and the numbers in this case were black and white (pardon the pun!). How many times were white people stopped, how many times were black people stopped, what are their respective portions of the population.
Mind you I wholeheartedly agree that we should think critically about what we're told, regardless of who is doing the telling, naturally.
I read the study. They published the raw data, so that is a big plus. This allows reproducibility, to some extent. The subjective weighting of some of the data may produce slightly different results. The last paragraphs discuss the traffic stops and searches of Washington State and Colorado, after the legalization of marijuana. It noted that a precipitous decrease in traffic stops among all three of their categories of ethnicities. It is interesting to note that only whites, blacks and latino people were culled from all the stops. I would be very curious to see any analysis of asian and middle eastern people. I suspect that these ethicities would have a much lower occurrence of stops and searches than the other three. The interesting take away is the number of white drivers that are stopped and subsequently searched have a higher rate of "hits" I.e. contraband is located and seized. Throughout the study of the data, there are numerous mentions of how the data could be misinterpreted and reveal a racial bias when none would necessarily be true. I particularly like the conclusions that by removing activities or particular items from being considered contraband would reduce the effects of policing on ethnic minorities. This particular statement stuck out like a sore thumb to me. "Our results, however, also point to the power of policy interventions—specifically, legalization of recreational marijuana—to reduce these racial disparities." & "Similarly, enforcement of minor traffic violations, like broken tail lights—even if conducted uniformly and without animus—can place heavy burdens on black and Hispanic drivers without improving public safety". These two statements in the conclusion/discussion portion of the study are clearly implying that traffic stops have been affected by actual valid reasons and are not simply because the officer had racial animus against the drivers. This leads to a possible conclusion that the people being stopped are selected for reasons other than ethnicity and that actual violations occurred that many be related to ethnicity, but not because of bias.
I'm not going to draw any conclusions from the "hits" datapoint, but it sounds like if there are more "misses" on the other side, that they're more likely to be stopped for baseless reasons, no? Would require a little more digging through the data I suppose.
Your possible conclusion could have an impact on the data, but I have reservations that it would make up the entire disparity.
It also raises questions that can't be answered by the available data -- are blacks & hispanics with a broken taillight more likely to be pulled over than whites with a broken taillight?
I honestly think that if all things are equal, there would be an insignificant delta between ethnicity. For example; two separate vehicles commit the same violation. Both vehicles are late models in good repair, both the same model and make, both drivers are dressed respectably. I don't believe ethnicity is as significant a factor as we are being led to believe. I am fairly certain that appearance and attitude have more to do with interactions. The more the hype about ethnic bias is pimped out, the more likely a citizen is likely to speak with an attitude and create an escalation. Where I work, we have a very diverse workforce. Almost all are electrical engineers or another engineering discipline. None of my coworkers dress or act like thugs or low class trash. There doesn't seem to be any issues with law enforcement. In our location, we have approx 3000 employees with an additional 2000 contractors. I obviously don't know everyone personally, but it would be big news if someone got in any trouble. They would definitely lose their job.
Would be great if all things were equal, and if everyone had the same opportunities and starting place in the race.. but I think we can see that's a whole other can of worms ;)
If you're speaking of the study I think you are, it was more about "scientists" creating small-sample studies to find correlations that would generate viral headlines (and funding), usually to do with food, and the extent to which researchers would trip over themselves to make such a connection.
It shouldn't be used so broadly to discredit anything one doesn't like. The study referenced earlier was based on millions of pre-existing traffic stops which couldn't be massaged to the will of the person conducting the studies, and the numbers in this case were black and white (pardon the pun!). How many times were white people stopped, how many times were black people stopped, what are their respective portions of the population.
Mind you I wholeheartedly agree that we should think critically about what we're told, regardless of who is doing the telling, naturally.
I read the study. They published the raw data, so that is a big plus. This allows reproducibility, to some extent. The subjective weighting of some of the data may produce slightly different results. The last paragraphs discuss the traffic stops and searches of Washington State and Colorado, after the legalization of marijuana. It noted that a precipitous decrease in traffic stops among all three of their categories of ethnicities. It is interesting to note that only whites, blacks and latino people were culled from all the stops. I would be very curious to see any analysis of asian and middle eastern people. I suspect that these ethicities would have a much lower occurrence of stops and searches than the other three. The interesting take away is the number of white drivers that are stopped and subsequently searched have a higher rate of "hits" I.e. contraband is located and seized. Throughout the study of the data, there are numerous mentions of how the data could be misinterpreted and reveal a racial bias when none would necessarily be true. I particularly like the conclusions that by removing activities or particular items from being considered contraband would reduce the effects of policing on ethnic minorities. This particular statement stuck out like a sore thumb to me. "Our results, however, also point to the power of policy interventions—specifically, legalization of recreational marijuana—to reduce these racial disparities." & "Similarly, enforcement of minor traffic violations, like broken tail lights—even if conducted uniformly and without animus—can place heavy burdens on black and Hispanic drivers without improving public safety". These two statements in the conclusion/discussion portion of the study are clearly implying that traffic stops have been affected by actual valid reasons and are not simply because the officer had racial animus against the drivers. This leads to a possible conclusion that the people being stopped are selected for reasons other than ethnicity and that actual violations occurred that many be related to ethnicity, but not because of bias.
I appreciate the analysis.
I'm not going to draw any conclusions from the "hits" datapoint, but it sounds like if there are more "misses" on the other side, that they're more likely to be stopped for baseless reasons, no? Would require a little more digging through the data I suppose.
Your possible conclusion could have an impact on the data, but I have reservations that it would make up the entire disparity.
It also raises questions that can't be answered by the available data -- are blacks & hispanics with a broken taillight more likely to be pulled over than whites with a broken taillight?
I honestly think that if all things are equal, there would be an insignificant delta between ethnicity. For example; two separate vehicles commit the same violation. Both vehicles are late models in good repair, both the same model and make, both drivers are dressed respectably. I don't believe ethnicity is as significant a factor as we are being led to believe. I am fairly certain that appearance and attitude have more to do with interactions. The more the hype about ethnic bias is pimped out, the more likely a citizen is likely to speak with an attitude and create an escalation. Where I work, we have a very diverse workforce. Almost all are electrical engineers or another engineering discipline. None of my coworkers dress or act like thugs or low class trash. There doesn't seem to be any issues with law enforcement. In our location, we have approx 3000 employees with an additional 2000 contractors. I obviously don't know everyone personally, but it would be big news if someone got in any trouble. They would definitely lose their job.
Would be great if all things were equal, and if everyone had the same opportunities and starting place in the race.. but I think we can see that's a whole other can of worms ;)
Thanks for the discussion and the insights
Can you send me a link? I would be happy to read the study and look at the raw data sources.
Nevermind. I see you posted it already. I will read it. Thanks.