Page 261 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

244 Chapter 9

Evaluating Survey and Statistical Data Factual- type statements, including statistics
or the results of surveys, need to be evaluated carefully for dependability. Surveying is
a sophisticated operation. The questions and who asks them can make a big differ-
ence in the results. Ask the following questions when evaluating statistics: Who com-
missioned the study? How were the data gathered and analyzed? How were questions
phrased? You may need the help of an expert to evaluate and interpret statistical data
properly, especially if you are basing an important conclusion on those data.

Evaluating the Sources and Implications of Opinions When first introduced to the
differences between facts and opinions, some students act as if statements of opinion
are less valuable in a discussion. Hardly so! Facts provide the basis for discussion and
debate. As we discussed regarding types of questions, groups must deal not only with
what has already been verified but also determine priorities of values, ethics, goals,
and procedures acceptable to all. Members make inferences about what will probably
happen if they adopt each possible alternative. For example, facts regarding AIDS and
how it is spread are fairly well known, but what a particular board of education will do
about it depends on the values, opinions, and judgments about policies that will be
acceptable to the community.
All people have an equal right to express their opinions, but opinions themselves
are not all equal. Opinions can be evaluated for their validity and appropriate use of
fact. First, consider the source of the opinion.
1. Is this person (or other source) a recognized expert on the subject? How do
other experts in the field regard this person? If their opinions are different,
how might this be explained?
2. Does the source have a vested interest that might have influenced the opinion?
For example, a flood victim, insurance agent, politician, and taxpayer will have
different opinions about whether government should reimburse victims of
natural disasters for all their losses.
3. How well does the source support the opinion with documented evidence?
Is the evidence well organized, with supporting statistics and tables and clear
reasoning?
4. How consistent is this opinion with others expressed by the source? If not
consistent, is there an acceptable explanation for the person’s inconsistency?
Second, consider the implications of the opinion. Where does the conclusion lead,
and is that acceptable to the group? For example, as we write this, the president has
proposed a travel ban from six predominantly Muslim countries as a way to combat
terrorism in the United States. What are the implications of this? That terrorist
attacks have been carried out by visitors from these countries? That terrorist attacks
have not been carried out by visitors from other countries? That the United States is
more vulnerable to terrorist attacks by individuals from outside the United States?
That only Muslims commit violence in the United States? Answers to these questions
contributed to the courts not supporting this particular travel ban.

gal37018_ch09_225_258.indd 244 3/28/18 12:37 PM