Advertisement

Confronting Data Analysis with Constructivist Philosophy

  • Christian Hennig
Part of the Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization book series (STUDIES CLASS)

Abstract

This paper develops some ideas from the confrontation of data analysis with constructivist philosophy. This epistemology considers reality only dependent of its observers. Objective reality can never be observed. Perceptions are not considered as representations of objective reality, but as a means of the self-organization of humans. In data analysis, this leads to thoughts about the impact of the gathering of data to the reality, the necessity of subjective decisions and their frank discussion, the nature of statistical predictions, and the role of probability models (frequentist and epistemic). An example from market segmentation is discussed.

Keywords

Probability Model Objective Reality Market Segmentation Data Analyst Subjective Decision 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BERGER, P. L. and LUCKMANN, T. (1966): The Social Construction of Reality. Anchor Books, New York.Google Scholar
  2. CARROLL, J. D. and CHATURVEDI, A. (1998): K-Midranges Clustering. In: A. Rizzi, M. Vichi, and H.-H. Bock (Eds.): Advances in Data Science and Classification. Springer, Heidelberg, 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. DAVIES, P. L. (1995): Data Features. Statistica Neerlandica, 49, 185–245.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. DAVIES, P. L. and KOVAC, A. (2001): Local extremes, runs, strings and multiresolution. Annals of Statistics, 29, 1–47.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. FEYERABEND, P. (1988): Against Method (revised version). Verso, London.Google Scholar
  6. GERGEN, K. J. and DAVIS, K. E. (1985) (Eds.): The Social Construction of the Person. Springer, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. HAMPEL, F. (1998): Is statistics too difficult? Canadian Journal of Statistics, 26, 497–513.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. TUKEY, J. W. (1962): The future of data analysis. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 33, 1–67.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. TUKEY, J. W. (1997): More honest foundations for data analysis. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 57, 21–28.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. VON GLASERSFELD, E. (1995): Radical Constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning. The Falmer Press, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. WALLEY, P. (1991): Statistical Reasoning with Imprecise Probabilities. Chapman and Hall, London.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. WATZLAWICK, P. (1984) (Ed.): The Invented Reality. Norton, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Hennig
    • 1
  1. 1.Seminar für StatistikETH-Zentrum (LEO)ZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations