2.3.6 Ukungabonisi

Idatha engabonakali yimbi ngokukhipha okuvela ngaphandle kwesampula, kodwa ingasiza kakhulu ekuqhathaniseni okungaphakathi ngaphakathi kwesampula.

Abanye ososayensi bezenhlalakahle bajwayele ukusebenza ngedatha evela esampula esingahleliwe esivela emphakathini ochazwe kahle, njengabo bonke abadala ezweni elithile. Lolu hlobo lwedatha lubizwa ngokuthi idatha emele ngoba isampula "imelela" abantu abaningi. Abacwaningi abaningi bancome idatha emele, futhi kwabanye, idatha emeleyo ifana nesayensi eqinile kodwa idatha engabonakali iyabonakala ngokufana nesithakazelo. Ngokweqile kakhulu, abanye abathandabuza babonakala bakholelwa ukuthi akukho lutho olungafundwa kumininingwane engekho emthethweni. Uma kuyiqiniso, lokhu kubonakala kunciphisa kakhulu lokho okungafundwa emithonjeni emikhulu yedatha ngoba eziningi zazo azimele. Ngenhlanhla, laba bantu abanokholo bahlelekile kancane. Kukhona imigomo ethile yokucwaninga yokuthi iyiphi idatha engeyona into ecacile ayifaneleki kahle, kodwa kunezinye ezingase zisebenzise ngempela.

Ukuze siqonde lokhu kwahlukana, ake sicabangele isigaba sezesayensi: Ucwaningo lukaJohn Snow lwe-kilera ka-1853-54 ukuqhuma eLondon. Ngaleso sikhathi, odokotela abaningi bakholelwa ukuthi ukwelashwa kwabangelwa "umoya omubi," kodwa i-Snow yayikholelwa ukuthi yisifo esithathelwanayo, mhlawumbe esasakazwa ngamanzi okuphuza ahlanzekile. Ukuze uhlole lo mbono, i-Snow inzuzo ngalokho esingase sikubize manje ukuhlolwa kwemvelo. Waqhathanisa amazinga ekholera emizini ekhonjwe izinkampani ezimbili zamanzi ezihlukene: Lambeth and Southwark & ​​Vauxhall. Lezi zinkampani zisebenzela imizi efanayo, kodwa zahluke ngendlela eyodwa ebalulekile: ngo-1849-eminyakeni embalwa ngaphambi kwalesi sifo-i-Lambeth yashukumisela iphuzu layo lokuphakama emgwaqeni ovela eLondon, kanti i-Southwark neVauxhall bashiya ipayipi yabo yokungena ngaphansi ukukhishwa kwamanzi. Lapho iqhwa liqhathanisa amazinga okufa ekholera emakhaya akhonza yizinkampani ezimbili, wathola ukuthi amakhasimende aseNingizimuwark neVauxhall-inkampani eyayinikezela amakhasimende amanzi ahlanzekile-ayenamathuba angama-10 okufa ngekhamera. Lo mphumela unikeza ubufakazi obuqinile besayensi mayelana nokuphikisana kweSithandana mayelana nesibindi sekholera, nakuba kungekelwe kwisampula emele abantu eLondon.

Idatha evela kulezi zinkampani ezimbili, noma kunjalo, ayengeke ibe yindawo efanele yokuphendula umbuzo ohlukile: yikuphi ukusabalala kwekholera eLondon ngenkathi kuqhambuka? Kulo mbuzo wesibili, okubaluleke kakhulu, kungcono kakhulu ukuba nesampula esimele sabantu baseLondon.

Njengoba umsebenzi weSiqhwa ubonisa, kunemibuzo ethile yesayense yokuthi iyiphi idatha engabonakali ingasebenza futhi kunezinye ezingakulungele kahle. Indlela eyodwa engafanele yokuhlukanisa lezi zinhlobo ezimbili zemibuzo ukuthi imibuzo eminye iphathelene nokuqhathanisa okungaphakathi ngaphakathi kwesampula kanti ezinye ziphathelene nokukhishwa kwe-sampula engaphandle kwesampula. Lokhu kuhlukaniswa kungahle kuboniswe ngenye inhlolovo yama-classic ku-epidemiology: i-British Doctors Study, eyadlala indima ebalulekile ekuboniseni ukuthi ukubhema kubangela umdlavuza. Kulolu cwaningo, uRichard Doll no-A. Bradford Hill balandela odokotela abangaba ngu-25 000 iminyaka eminingana futhi baqhathanisa amazinga abo okufa esekelwe inani ababhema ngalo lapho isifundo siqala. I-doll ne-Hill (1954) ithole ubudlelwane obuqinile bokuziphendulela-impendulo: lapho abantu bevutha kakhulu, kungenzeka ukuthi bazofa ngomdlavuza wamaphaphu. Yiqiniso, bekungeke kube ukuhlakanipha ukulinganisa ukusabalalisa komdlavuza wamaphaphu phakathi kwabo bonke abantu baseBrithani abaxhomeke kuleli qembu ladokotela besilisa, kodwa ukuqhathaniswa okungaphakathi ngaphakathi kwesampula kusinikeza ubufakazi bokuthi ukubhema kubangela umdlavuza wamaphaphu.

Manje njengoba ngibonisa umehluko phakathi kokuqhathaniswa kwangaphakathi-kwesampula kanye nokukhishwa kwe-sampula, ama-caveats amabili ahlelekile. Okokuqala, kukhona imibuzo engokwemvelo mayelana nokuthi ubuhlobo obunamathekisthi odokotela baseBrithani buzoba nobani phakathi kwesampula yamantombazane, odokotela baseBrithani noma abasebenzi baseBrithani abakhiqizi bezisebenzi noma abasebenzi baseFrance basezimbini noma amanye amaqembu amaningi. Le mibuzo iyathakazelisa futhi ibalulekile, kodwa ayifani nemibandela mayelana nokuthi singakwazi kanjani ukukhiqiza isampula kubantu. Qaphela, isibonelo, ukuthi usola ukuthi ubuhlobo phakathi kokubhema nomdlavuza obutholakala odokotela baseBrithani bendoda cishe kuyofana nalezi ezinye amaqembu. Ikhono lakho lokwenza le-extrapolation aluveli kulokho ukuthi odokotela baseBrithani abesilisa bangamamphesenti okungahleliwe kunoma yimuphi umuntu; kunalokho, kubangelwa ukuqonda indlela ehlobene nokubhema nomdlavuza. Ngakho-ke, ukukhiqizwa okuvela esampula kuya kubantu okuvela kuwo okuyiyona enkulu inkinga yezibalo, kodwa imibuzo mayelana nokuthuthwa kwephethini etholakala eqenjini elilodwa kwelinye iqembu ikakhulukazi yi-nonstatistical issue (Pearl and Bareinboim 2014; Pearl 2015) .

Kuleli qophelo, amandla angamahloni akhomba ukuthi amaphethini amaningi ezentengiselwano cishe angaphansi kokuthuthwa kwamanye amaqembu kunokuba ubuhlobo phakathi kokubhema nomdlavuza. Futhi ngiyavuma. Izinga okufanele silindele ukuthi amaphethini alandelwe ukuthutha ngumbuzo wesayensi okufanele uthathelwe kuncike ekufundiseni kanye nobufakazi. Akufanele kucatshangelwe ngokuzenzakalelayo ukuthi amaphethini azokwazi ukuthuthwa, kodwa futhi akufanele kucatshangwe ukuthi ngeke athutheke. Le mibuzo engabonakali mayelana nokuthutha izokujwayela uma ulandelele izingxabano mayelana nokuthi kungakanani abacwaningi (Sears 1986, [@henrich_most_2010] ) ngokuziphatha kwabantu ngokufunda izifundo zabafundi be-undergraduate (Sears 1986, [@henrich_most_2010] ) . Naphezu kwalezi zingxabano, kungenangqondo ukusho ukuthi abacwaningi abakwazi ukufunda noma yini ngokufunda abafundi be-undergraduate.

I-caveat yesibili yilapho iningi labacwaningi abanemininingwane engabonakali akuyona njengeqhwa njenge-Snow noma Doll ne-Hill. Ngakho-ke, ukubonisa ukuthi yini engalungile uma abacwaningi bezama ukwenza ukukhiqizwa kokuphuma kwesampula kusuka kumininingwane engabonakali, ngingathanda ukukutshela ngokutadisha ukhetho lukaPhalamende luka-2009 luka-Andranik Tumasjan nozakwethu (2010) . Ngokuhlaziya ama-tweets angaphezu kuka-100,000, bathole ukuthi inani lamathebhu okukhulunywa ngalo ngeqembu lezombangazwe lilinganisa inani lamavoti iqembu elitholwa okhethweni lamaphalamende (isibalo 2.3). Ngamanye amazwi, kubonakala ukuthi idatha ye-Twitter, eyayikhululekile, ingayithatha indawo yokuhlola imibono yomphakathi yendabuko, ebiza kakhulu ngenxa yokugcizelela kwabo idatha emele.

Njengoba unikeziwe ukuthi ngabe usuvele wazi kanjani nge-Twitter, kufanele ngokushesha ube neqiniso kulo mphumela. AmaJalimane ku-Twitter ngo-2009 ayengeyona isampula engahleliwe yabavoti baseJalimane, futhi abalandeli bezinye izingxenye bangase baxoxe ngezepolitiki ngokuphindaphindiwe kunokusekela amanye amaqembu. Ngakho-ke, kubonakala kuyamangaza ukuthi konke okungahle kwenzeke ukuthi ungase ucabange ukuthi ngandlela-thile kuzokhishwa ukuze lolu datha luzoveza ngokuqondile abavoti baseJalimane. Empeleni, imiphumela ku Tumasjan et al. (2010) kuye kwaba kuhle kakhulu ukuba kube yiqiniso. Iphepha lokulandelela lika-Andreas Jungherr, uPascal Jürgens, noHarald Schoen (2012) likhomba ukuthi ukuhlaziywa kwasekuqaleni kwakungekho iqembu lezombusazwe eliye lathola ukukhulunywa kakhulu kwi-Twitter: i-Pirate Party, iqembu elincane elilwa nomthetho kahulumeni ye-intanethi. Lapho i-Pirate Party ihlanganisiwe ekuhlaziyweni, ukukhulunywa nge-Twitter kuba yisenzo esibi kakhulu semiphumela yokhetho (isibalo 2.3). Njengoba lesi sibonelo sibonisa, ukusebenzisa imithombo emikhulu yedatha engabonakali ukwenza ukukhiqizwa kokuphuma kwesampula kungahamba kabi kakhulu. Futhi, kufanele uqaphele ukuthi iqiniso lokuthi kwakukhona ama-tweets angu-100,000 okwakungavumelani nalutho: imininingwane eminingi engabonakali ayisabonakali, isihloko engizobuyela kuso esahlukweni 3 lapho ngixoxa ngezinhlolovo.

Umdwebo 2.3: (Tumasjan et al. 2010) Twitter kubonakala kubikezela imiphumela yamakhetho aseJalimane ka-2009 (Tumasjan et al. 2010) , kodwa lokhu akubandakanyi iqembu (Jungherr, Jürgens, and Schoen 2012) amaningi: I-Pirate Party (Jungherr, Jürgens, and Schoen 2012) . Bheka i- Tumasjan et al. (2012) ngenjongo yokuphikisana ngokungafaki i-Pirate Party. Ishintshwe ku- Tumasjan et al. (2010) , ithebula 4 Jungherr, Jürgens, and Schoen (2012) , ithebula 2.

Ukuphetha, imithombo eminingi yedatha enkulu ayiyona amasampula emele kusuka kwabanye abantu abachazwe kahle. Ukuze uthole imibuzo efuna ukukhiqiza imiphumela kusuka kwisampula kubantu esivela kuyo, lokhu kuyinkinga enkulu. Kodwa ngokubuza imibuzo mayelana nokuqhathaniswa kwangaphakathi-isampula, idatha engabonakali ingaba namandla, uma nje abacwaningi becacile mayelana nezici zesampula zabo nezesekelo zokusekela mayelana nokuthutha ngokufaka ubufakazi obunembile noma obunamandla. Eqinisweni, ithemba lami ukuthi imithombo emikhulu yedatha izokwenza abacwaningi benze ukungalingani okungaphezulu kwesampula emaqenjini amaningi angabonakali, futhi ukuqagela ukuthi ukuthi izilinganiso ezivela emaqenjini ahlukene azokwenza okuningi ukuthuthukisa ucwaningo lwezenhlalo kunokulinganisa okukodwa kusuka kokungahleliwe okungahleliwe isampula.