Statistics

Statistics are numerical methods of describing events or ideas. Statistics can be rather difficult for listeners to understand, but when used in conjunction with other methods of support, they can help to clarify points considerably. In a discussion of teen-age marriages, a person may use an example of a couple who had an unsuccessful marriage, then go on to cite that the divorce rate for couples who marry in their teens is double that of older married couples, and that even the divorce rate of older couples is fairly high. Here statistics are used to show that the conclusion drawn from the example is in fact valid and not a hasty generalization.

Statistics can also be abused, however. Advertisements are often misleading when they state that "Skyhighs now relieve pain twice as fast." The assumption is that they act twice as fast as some competitor's product. But perhaps they only relieve pain twice as fast as they did two years ago and indeed take effect no faster than any of the competing products. We don't know. We would have to ask, "Twice as fast as what?" What are the terms of the comparison? Is this product being compared with itself or something else? This use of statistics, like the propaganda devices of card stacking or half truths, is misleading in that it presents a biased or distorted view of the truth.

Another propaganda device that makes use of statistics is the bandwagon appeal. One student survey of college cheating showed that certain percentages of students cheat on exams. Using statistics from this survey, a speaker could claim that cheating is acceptable since other people do it too. Statistics, then, can be used properly or improperly depending on the user and the situation. This is illustrated by the old adage "Statistics don't lie, but liars may use statistics."

The critical listener must attempt to determine if the speaker clearly reveals and defines what unit of measure is being used in the statistics and what is being compared (e.g., is a product being compared to itself or to its competitor?)

Testimony or Quotations

The fourth method of supporting an idea is through the use of testimony or quotations. Ideas often are more acceptable to listeners if they think the ideas have been accepted by others, especially if those others are either prestigious or expert. For example, in arguing the effects of marijuana, a speaker might use quotations from medical authorities to show that her point or position is supported by expert opinion. Lawyers in the courtroom frequently use this technique to establish the probable validity of their cases. Consider, for example, this courtroom comment:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the coroner's report showed that the time of death was between midnight_and six a.m. on the night of May sixteenth.We have established that my client was nowhere near the scene of the crime on the night of the sixteenth. Therefore, my client could not have committed the murder.

In this case, the coroner's expert testimony helps prove the innocence of the client.

In many informal conversations we cite trusted or respected others who support a given point as a means of making our point more believable. However testimony and quotations, like other methods of support, can be misused. Often people who are expert in one field have strong opinions in fields where they have little or no expertise. The critical listener may catch this and realize that the testimonials used are not valid. Rev. Jerry Falwell's opinions on religion, for example, would probably be acceptable as expert authority; his opinions on apartheid, however, would not have the same validity.

The propaganda device of plain folks represents another misuse of testimony. Middle-aged professors who dress like their students in an attempt to identify with their listeners often look ridiculous. Politicians who try to overidentify with their constituents (by milking cows or wearing ten-gallon hats) may be using the plain folks approach.

Probably the most crucial point to remember about critical listening is that you must first listen and be able to identify the point the speaker is trying to make, then listen for and evaluate the method of support the speaker uses to prove that point. So often in conversations listeners will remember the example a speaker uses and miss the point that the example was supposed to illustrate.