The Data Scientist Oath (Part 2)

Today, we are bombarded by data and information as FACTS. We accept what is in chart from any printed source as if it is a FACT and therefore true. Let me illustrate with sublime example.

half & half pie chart
Chart 1: A simple pie chart

If the title of this chart is “Households with Gourmet Cooks”, you might be influenced to run out an buy stock in a company that makes gourmet cooking equipment like Middleby Corporation the makers of Viking kitchen equipment. If the title of this chart is “Households with Gourmet Cooks (sample size = 2)” or “Households with Gourmet Cooks (Std. Dev. = N/A), you’d probably not. In fact, you’d probably wonder why I built the chart, and yet we frequently fall into this trap and don’t even ask for the transparency. The data scientist presenting his data should always tell you how they arrived at their conclusion.

Unfortunately it happens almost everyday in trusted sources ranging from news magazines, newspapers, documents at work, and in every aspect of the Internet (social, web sites, e-mail, etc.). The Internet is huge force multiplier, which enables one zealot to look like an entire movement and their arguments look like widely accepted FACTS.



There are even more subtle ways of influencing you especially with cultural and emotional cues. If you look at the charts below, what happens if the title for both charts which are identical is “Evil is winning the war over Good.”

In the first chart, you might initially draw that conclusion that evil is wining big time. We assume red represents evil since red is the color of the devil in the Western world. We react to the color and not the fact fact that evil is a 2% green slice. Plus the text in the legend is small and hard to read. In the second chart, you’d look at it and think the author is an idiot since the evil slice is clearly a tiny 2%. How information is represented is almost as important as the source data and methods used to turn it into information. Even good information can be displayed poorly.

PT Barnum said “you can’t fool all the people all the time, but you can fool all of the people some of the time” and I agree we all do get fooled occasionally. It is each individual’s responsibility to consume data carefully and consider the source and how the information is being displayed to minimize the “some of the time” to almost always never.

It is the responsibility of the data scientist to try to present the information in good faith, transparently, and with as little bias as possible. Stan Lee via Spiderman Comics said via wise Uncle Ben Parker “that with great power comes great responsibility.” If you work with data and publish it then understand the potential influence and power over people’s opinions, thoughts, feelings, and potential actions and use it wisely.

Start with a simple Data Scientist oath or code. “As a Data Scientist, I will understand the veracity and validity of my data and its sources, and I will clearly, transparently and with minimal cultural bias display the results so the end consumer can make valid conclusions.”

It is that simple. How cool is that you get to side with Stan Lee and all his comic book heroes and become a real hero by making every effort to represent the truth as plainly and obviously with unflinching transparency as humanly possible.


The Data Scientist Oath (Part 1)

I believe in the truth. Truth is in the eye of the beholder. When the beholder is a single person, or very small part of the population that has an idea that group will try to influence the rest of the population it is correct. Almost every conversation is a negotiation of what should be the dominant truth.

“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics [Data Scientist Output]”Benjamin Disraeli.

Today, we employ data scientist to distill data and facts into information. I believe we should hold data scientist to higher standard than most people. It is their sworn duty to ensure that they understand and make veracity of the data and their conclusions 100% transparent.


While Veracity is just one of the 4-V’s of Big Data, it is the most critical element. Up until now, we assumed data was gathered through a scientific process, using a scientific instrument, guided by a scientific review, and driving to scientific conclusion of a hypothesis. Unfortunately, today, it is an incorrect assumption.

We must understand that all data must be considered big data. I realize that technically all data is NOT big data, but as we shift from using data only in science to using it in every aspect of our lives, we must now treat it all as big data.

Part one of the Data Scientist Oath is about the input of data into the model. It is critical that the Data Scientist always utilizes the highest quality of data possible for his model from known source so that he can treat the veracity of the data correctly and be transparent to his clients in the final products.

In the next part, I’ll address the output side of the oath with some more simple examples that clearly illustrate how easy facts can be distorted. I’ll conclude with a summary and some next steps towards a Data Scientist Oath.