= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
JoshuaFox comments on Absence of Evidence Is Evidence of Absence - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (108)
If all you have is some generic crime data, then more crime in a region can indicate that the Mafia is strong. On the other hand, Mafias keep their own neighborhoods, and the Mafia sometimes can suppress police activity through corruption, so a very low crime rate can indicate that the Mafia is strong.
Of course, background details would suggest which of these is indicated by the evidence
The crime rate has gone up. This means that everything is getting worse and the police are ineffective.
The crime rate has gone up. This means that the police are getting better at catching formerly clandestine criminal behavior.
It would be possible to distinguish between those hypotheses by looking at the ratio of crimes reported to crimes successfully prosecuted.
Seems reasonable to me; if there's the expected amount of crime in an area, then it's not too worthy of special attention. If there's a higher than usual amount of crime, then it's clearly worthy of special attention.
However, if there's a lower than usual amount of crime, then it's also worthy of special attention, because that indicates that something odd is happening there (or, it indicates that something has genuinely reduced the amount of crime and not just the metric, which is worth investigating and hopefully replicating).