# at what level of accuracy does a stereotype become a fair representation? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 21, 2014, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111 "2014-09-21T21:37:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/41 "2014-09-23T18:07:12Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I understand what the phrase means and why it’s used. I’m asking when a stereotype would actually be useful, and this is a hypothetical that doesn’t take place in the real world. You would not ever make this kind of decision with no other information available and no other factors involved. Anyone in this position would prefer actual data to stereotypes. So what is the value of stereotyping here? Further, there’s no information that could possibly be useful in any stereotype that couldn’t be found elsewhere – even if it were useful to know the drinking habits of various ethnic groups, this could be found from various statistics on alcohol consumption, rather than cultural and societal stereotypes. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/42 "2014-09-23T18:12:40Z")
When it gets to a level where the marketing department can quantify it as a trend. > [@Mr.Nylock](#): > > In hiring situations, stereotyping may have a positive benefit, as long as it is the right kind of stereotyping. For example if you need to hire a smart guy, you would hire the guy from stanford Yale Princeton, harvard - not the guy from state U all things being equal. The guy from state U, may be better, but based on that example your odds of getting the better candidate are better if you use stereotyping and applying the laws of statistics to applicant pools. I think appropriate economic term is “Statistical discrimination” I do not know to what extent the hiring manager who employs this technique will have greater success than the one who does not; I only know of the theory itself. That’s a bit different. Stanford, Yale, Princeton and Harvard are self selecting groups with extremely competitive selection criteria. So if someone graduates from one of those schools, one can generally (but not always) assume they have met certain criteria for academic and intellectual achievement. And one fallacy with that approach is that the Ivy League and other elite colleges are not the all inclusive set of smart, hardworking students. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/43 "2014-09-23T18:34:38Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I understand what the phrase means and why it’s used. I’m asking when a stereotype would actually be useful, and this is a hypothetical that doesn’t take place in the real world. You would not ever make this kind of decision with no other information available and no other factors involved. I’ve already addressed all this and you’re just repeating yourself. > [@](#): > > Anyone in this position would prefer actual data to stereotypes. So what is the value of stereotyping here? This too. You might prefer all sorts of things but it’s not always practical or feasible to get them. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/44 "2014-09-23T18:39:40Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’ve already addressed all this and you’re just repeating yourself.This too. You didn’t address it at all. You repeated that it was a hypothetical. > [@](#): > > You might prefer all sorts of things but it’s not always practical or feasible to get them. For reasons that are imaginary. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/45 "2014-09-23T19:02:26Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > You didn’t address it at all. You repeated that it was a hypothetical. What I said, in the sentence following the one you quoted, was: “_But anything which is the deciding factor when all else is equal will generally be a factor among others when all else is not equal._” Not surprising that you cut off your quote before that line, because this way you could go back to harping about how “You would not ever make this kind of decision with no other information available and no other factors involved”, which ignores the point I made. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/46 "2014-09-23T19:03:47Z")
When do you make a decision with no data available and only a stereotype as “a factor among many?” ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/47 "2014-09-23T19:05:47Z")
See post #39. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/48 "2014-09-23T19:24:53Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > See post #39. I saw it already. In that scenario, why are you forced to base your judgment on stereotypes instead of getting facts? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/49 "2014-09-23T19:30:39Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I saw it already. Then you shouldn’t pretend you haven’t. > [@](#): > > In that scenario, why are you forced to base your judgment on stereotypes instead of getting facts? Because the amount it would cost to commission a study is not necesarily worthwhile for the investment you’re making. It sounds like you may be unfamiliar with the nature of this type of investing - or else you just play that way on a MB - but investment decisions of this sort frequently involve all sorts of non-factual hunches, whether involving stereotypes or not. [This is in addition to the fact that the post also illustrated an example of the stereotype being one factor among others.] ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Nylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/77aa72/32.png) [@Mr.Nylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Nylock)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/50 "2014-09-23T19:48:06Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > That’s a bit different. Stanford, Yale, Princeton and Harvard are self selecting groups with extremely competitive selection criteria. So if someone graduates from one of those schools, one can generally (but not always) assume they have met certain criteria for academic and intellectual achievement. And one fallacy with that approach is that the Ivy League and other elite colleges are not the all inclusive set of smart, hardworking students. True, I was thinking of those caveats when I posted. There are probably better examples of statistical discrimination in hiring that would be more pertinent to the conversation - but this was the least offensive one I could think of in a short amount of time. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2014, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/51 "2014-09-23T23:41:18Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It sounds like you may be unfamiliar with the nature of this type of investing - or else you just play that way on a MB - but investment decisions of this sort frequently involve all sorts of non-factual hunches, whether involving stereotypes or not. Is there any reason to believe that involving stereotypes as part of one’s “non-factual hunch” provides any benefit at all for investment decisions? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/52 "2014-09-24T00:17:19Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Because the amount it would cost to commission a study is not necesarily worthwhile for the investment you’re making. Who needs to conduct a study? If I want to find out which countries and cultures drink the most, I can Google it. If I want to know which neighborhoods have the most bars or liquor stores, I can Google that or check city records or do any number of other things. I may choose not to do that if I’m playing a hunch, but it’s an option. And of course you can base a bunch on lots of data just as easily as you can base it on a little. > [@](#): > > It sounds like you may be unfamiliar with the nature of this type of investing - or else you just play that way on a MB - but investment decisions of this sort frequently involve all sorts of non-factual hunches, whether involving stereotypes or not. People play hunches, sure. That’s not the same being forced to use a stereotype because other information isn’t available. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2014, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111/53 "2014-09-24T12:59:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Who needs to conduct a study? If I want to find out which countries and cultures drink the most, I can Google it. If I want to know which neighborhoods have the most bars or liquor stores, I can Google that or check city records or do any number of other things. I may choose not to do that if I’m playing a hunch, but it’s an option. And of course you can base a bunch on lots of data just as easily as you can base it on a little. You’re changing the meaning of the terms and the issues under discussion. The very premise of the OP was that some stereotypes have some amount of validity to them, and this was also the premise of the post that you commented on (which I then responded to, to begin this exchange). Your position then was not that stereotypes were necessarily always inaccurate or unreliable, but that even if they were true they were of no use. Your words (post #29): “What is that worth, though? To my mind that part of the issue is rarely addressed. OK, let’s pretend the Russian in this example is more likely to be a drunk than the Turk is. What do you do with that information?” My response to this was that the information can be useful in dealing with groups, and here we are. In that context, factual data that is itself only a confirmation of the stereotype doesn’t help your position. We’re _already_ pretending for purposes of your argument that the stereotype is true anyway. What you need is factual information that is independent of the stereotype. So Googling " to find out which countries and cultures drink the most" doesn’t help you. That’s just confirming the stereotype, and in the end you’re still going to be relying on the now-confirmed stereotype - you’ll be saying “I now _know_ that Russians drink more than Turks and since this neighborhood has mostly Russians and the other has mostly Turks, that’s one factor in favor of the first neighborhood”, which is completely besides the point. What you need in order to not rely on the stereotype is to ignore “which countries and cultures drink the most” and focus just on the drinking averages of the neighborhoods without reference to the ethnic composition. That’s a much more difficult task, of course. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-what-level-of-accuracy-does-a-stereotype-become-a-fair-representation/699111.md?page=2)