# Personal experience is not evidence? The hell you say! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 18, 2006, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196 "2006-04-18T19:02:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/21 "2006-04-18T20:43:34Z")
I was in the odd position once of having someone here give me the old “anecdote is not data” line when the story that I told was about me and was being written up as a training case at Harvard Medical School. There is another case study being written about a deceased family member that will appear in the literature some time in the future. I have a related academic background and I studied the cases for hours on end until I could discuss them almost as peers with any doctor they sent to see us. Somehow these cases that I have close, personal experience with are good enough to help train doctors and push science forward but they are just anecdotes if I share any part about them here. ---
**Author:** ![OtakuLoki](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac8455/32.png) [@OtakuLoki](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OtakuLoki)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/22 "2006-04-18T20:54:46Z")
**whole bean** , I’ve seen, and used, the phrases you’ve pitted. The reason that I tend to think that the phrases, limited as they must be by common sense limits, are still useful is that often an observer may use their anecdotal evidence as proof of a thesis that is, in fact, only marginally supported by the account in question. Forex, recently I found it suspicious that of the three persons in my family who vote, two of them were required, in a recent election, to vote via affadavit ballot. The fact that the two required to vote via affadavit ballot were both stubborn enough to remain unregistered with any political party is my anecdote. If, however, I start claiming that there is a conspiracy to keep independents from voting in Monroe County, and offering my anecdote as evidence, I would hope you’d throw it out. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/23 "2006-04-18T20:56:50Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > “anecdote is not data” I’ve always heard it as, “the plural of anecdote is not data.” The funny thing is, I think we could all agree that anecdote can mean:[A short account of an incident (especially a biographical one)](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=anecdote) . We could also agree that data is the plural of datum, and datum can mean: [A fact or proposition used to draw a conclusion or make a decision](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=datum). If we take only those anecdotes that are based in fact (no embellishments), then I have no problem envisioning a scenario where the plural of anecdotes (which in themselves are datum) is indeed data. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/24 "2006-04-18T20:59:22Z")
> [@OtakuLoki](#): > > **whole bean** , I’ve seen, and used, the phrases you’ve pitted. The reason that I tend to think that the phrases, limited as they must be by common sense limits, are still useful is that often an observer may use their anecdotal evidence as proof of a thesis that is, in fact, only marginally supported by the account in question. > > Forex, recently I found it suspicious that of the three persons in my family who vote, two of them were required, in a recent election, to vote via affadavit ballot. The fact that the two required to vote via affadavit ballot were both stubborn enough to remain unregistered with any political party is my anecdote. If, however, I start claiming that there is a conspiracy to keep independents from voting in Monroe County, and offering my anecdote as evidence, I would hope you’d throw it out. I would question your conclusion but not because you had no evidence, only because you had very little. I would sugges that your conclusion was the product of flawed inductive reasoning. ---
**Author:** ![OtakuLoki](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac8455/32.png) [@OtakuLoki](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OtakuLoki)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/25 "2006-04-18T21:05:03Z")
Actually, I’d think not mentioning that one of the two persons who had to vote AB had moved within the past six months would also be a factor. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/26 "2006-04-18T21:22:15Z")
Talk about your tempest pitting in a tea pot… Of course it all depends on context, and what me mean by “evidence”. Joe: Do you have any evidence that golbalization is bad for the American economy? Schmoe: My brother lost his job due to outsourcing! Two problems here: Something can be bad for Schmoe’s brother and still be good for the economy overall. But even if we accept it as “evidence”, it’s not significant or convincing. This sort of stuff happens all the time in GD. I’ve got evidence to prove it! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Duke\_of\_Rat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Duke\_of\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke_of_Rat)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/27 "2006-04-18T21:27:13Z")
Mendel: I have these fascinating stories to tell about some peas. Everybody: Just an anecdote, the plural of anecdote is not data. ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/28 "2006-04-18T21:36:25Z")
It very much depends on what you’re talking about. I think the most famous use of the “plural of anecdote is not data” line is by **Blake** in the “how high can cats jump?” thread. In that thread, people were offering personal testimony that their cats could clear tall buildings in a single bound, and **Blake** was stubbornly refusing to believe it. In this case, if you ask me, anecdotes \*were \*data, because the subject wasn’t terribly complicated: either a cat could jump vertically however many feet, or it couldn’t. But if, as in **John Mace** ’s example, you’re trying to generalize from a tiny, tiny sample, then of course the plural of anecdotes is _not_ data. Unless you can assemble ten thousand such anecdotes. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/29 "2006-04-18T21:40:47Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Talk about your tempest pitting in a tea pot… sorry, I’ll let it die so we can get to the more pressing matter of[plugging in an extension cord](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=367897) :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/30 "2006-04-18T21:41:24Z")
May I humbly suggest a replacement trite phrase: **The plural of anecdote is not proof.** ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/31 "2006-04-18T21:52:58Z")
> [@Sal Ammoniac](#): > > It very much depends on what you’re talking about. I think the most famous use of the “plural of anecdote is not data” line is by **Blake** in the “how high can cats jump?” thread. In that thread, people were offering personal testimony that their cats could clear tall buildings in a single bound, and **Blake** was stubbornly refusing to believe it. In this case, if you ask me, anecdotes \*were \*data, because the subject wasn’t terribly complicated: either a cat could jump vertically however many feet, or it couldn’t. > > But if, as in **John Mace** ’s example, you’re trying to generalize from a tiny, tiny sample, then of course the plural of anecdotes is _not_ data. Unless you can assemble ten thousand such anecdotes. Yeah, Blake was the one who introduced me to the phrase. As for John Mace’s example, in that case there is no plural – one bro, one job lost. But let’s say there were more – maybe 10,000 jobs lost – that’s data (of which each job lost is an anecdote for someone). ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/32 "2006-04-18T21:54:29Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > May I humbly suggest a replacement trite phrase: > > **The plural of anecdote is not proof.** but it could be ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/33 "2006-04-18T22:14:31Z")
> [@whole bean](#): > > but it could be Ah, but in science is anything ever actually _proved_? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/34 "2006-04-18T22:18:55Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > Ah, but in science is anything ever actually _proved_? 😉 uh, yeah. I mean, I guess. What kind of science are you talking about? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/35 "2006-04-18T22:27:12Z")
> [@whole bean](#): > > but it could be Nope; the nature of ‘anecdote’ is that it inherently isn’t rigorous. Proof requires rigor; no amount of anecdotes can impart it. After all, all 10,000 of those people might be mistaken. (If you think I’m kidding, open up a GD thread asking for anecdotes that prove God exists. Then listen to the non-theists. Cardinality _doesn’t_ matter.) ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/36 "2006-04-18T22:41:15Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Nope; the nature of ‘anecdote’ is that it inherently isn’t rigorous. .) Rigourously assemble enough of them though . . . > [@begbert2](#): > > Proof requires rigor; no amount of anecdotes can impart it. After all, all 10,000 of those people might be mistaken. but if they’re not? ( > [@begbert2](#): > > If you think I’m kidding, open up a GD thread asking for anecdotes that prove God exists. Then listen to the non-theists. Cardinality _doesn’t_ matter. This proves nothing 😛 as you asked me to take anecdotes to prove something terribly difficult, if not impossible to prove, but that does not mean anecdotes, enough of them at least, cannot be assembled as proof of something simpler to prove. I guess a lot of it depends on the burden of proof we are assigning to the task – I am a lawyer, not a scientist, so I look at proof differently – I confess that “data” has scientific conotations, so I guess in a purely scientific sense, “the plural of anecdote is not proof” might be true. I am simply not in a position to say. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/37 "2006-04-18T22:45:39Z")
From a serious empirical standpoint, unverifiable anecdotes from anonymous sources on the internet are pretty much worthless as evidence. We’ve seen our share of bogus stories and even self-proclaimed identities exposed around here. It’s not unfair to say that, while a poster’s story may be plausible or may even be true, it doesn’t meet any real standard of evidence and it would be foolish to treat it as such. Personal anecdotes can influence a discussion, be taken seriously or even generally believed but it wouldn’t be very rigorous to say that they can be taken as dispositive or settle a debate. They certainly can’t _prove_ anything. That’s not to say that I’m in the habit of dismissing everyone’s anecdotal claims as bullshit. I tend to take people at face value, but only in a provisional way. I still keep it in mind that just about anybody _could_ be lying so while I might (most of the time) lean towards accepting people’s stories as _probably_ true, I never accept any of it as settled fact. To quote Jerry Seinfeld, I wouldn’t put anything past anybody. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/38 "2006-04-18T22:47:23Z")
It’s difficult to generate well-controlled personal anecdotes. It limits the value of personal anecdotal data in a rigorously scientific sense. “The plural of anecdote is not data” lacks nuance, but I always figured that’s what the adage was getting at. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/39 "2006-04-18T22:50:23Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Nope; the nature of ‘anecdote’ is that it inherently isn’t rigorous. .) Rigourously assemble enough of them though . . . > [@begbert2](#): > > Proof requires rigor; no amount of anecdotes can impart it. After all, all 10,000 of those people might be mistaken. but if they’re not? ( > [@begbert2](#): > > If you think I’m kidding, open up a GD thread asking for anecdotes that prove God exists. Then listen to the non-theists. Cardinality _doesn’t_ matter. This proves nothing 😛 as you asked me to take anecdotes to prove something terribly difficult, if not impossible to prove, but that does not mean anecdotes, enough of them at least, cannot be assembled as proof of something simpler to prove. I guess a lot of it depends on the burden of proof we are assigning to the task – I am a lawyer, not a scientist, so I look at proof differently – I confess that “data” has scientific conotations, so I guess in a purely scientific sense, “the plural of anecdote is not proof” might be true. I am simply not in a position to say. ---
**Author:** ![jacquilynne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/67e7ee/32.png) [@jacquilynne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacquilynne)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2006, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196/40 "2006-04-18T23:07:46Z")
> [@jali](#): > > I think (and I’m no expert) that the spirit of \*\*Personal “observations” are not evidence. \*\* is that if I see one white cat, my conclusion that all cats are white will not be valid. Sure, but if your conclusion is ‘not all cats are black’ then your experience of seeing a white cat is, in fact, proof. It might not be well documented proof, mind you, so people still might not accept the story as true, but if it is true, it’s sufficient. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/personal-experience-is-not-evidence-the-hell-you-say/353196.md?page=3)