← william_catt.portfolio

Data Curiosities

The same numbers, two opposite stories.

A growing set of small, interactive explainers for the ways data quietly fools us — each one a single idea you can drag a slider and watch happen, in plain English first, then grounded in a real study. Start anywhere.

01Simpson's Paradox Live

A trend that flips when you zoom out

A pattern true in every group can reverse once you lump the groups together.

Exercise looks like it raises blood sugar — until you split by age and every band slopes the other way. With the real kidney-stone surgery case.

Explore →
02Confounding Live

The hidden cause behind a fake link

Two things rise together only because a lurking third thing drives both.

Ice-cream sales "cause" drownings — until you remember it's hot out. Hold the weather fixed and the link melts away.

Explore →
03Ecological Fallacy Live

What's true of groups, but not of people

A pattern measured on whole groups need not hold for the individuals in them.

Robinson's 1950 puzzle: regions with more immigrants were more literate, while immigrants themselves were less so.

Explore →
04Berkson's Paradox Live

A trade-off conjured by the filter

Selecting a group can invent a negative link between things that are actually unrelated.

Why do talented actors seem less good-looking? They aren't — you only ever see the famous, and fame needs one or the other.

Explore →
05Suppression Effect Live

An effect hiding in plain sight

A real effect can stay invisible until you account for something working against it.

Practice looks useless — even harmful — for your test score, because keen learners attempt harder tasks. Control for difficulty and the payoff appears.

Explore →
06Lord's Paradox Live

Two analysts, opposite conclusions

The same before-and-after data can show an effect, or none, depending on how you measure change.

Weigh students before and after a diet: compare the gains and it did nothing; adjust for the starting weight and it clearly worked.

Explore →
07M-Bias Live

When 'controlling for' backfires

Adjusting for the wrong variable can create bias rather than remove it.

Test prep looks unrelated to GPA — until you "control for" SAT, a collider, and conjure a link that isn't there.

Explore →
08Noncollapsibility Live

An effect that changes size on adjustment

Some measures of effect shift when you account for a variable — even with no confounding at all.

An odds ratio of 2.0 in every patient group can read as 1.5 once you pool them — with nothing confounded.

Explore →