For whatever it’s worth, I think your strongest example is the NY firetrucks (because it makes the audience feel a little bit silly...silly enough to want to remember to do it the right way, but not so silly as to be humiliated), and your weakest example is the Chinese garrison. Unless you’ve recently seen Mulan or whatever, it’s tricky to empathize with a Chinese garrison, and it’s certainly not funny. I would see if you can find another, more light-hearted example to get across the idea of wanting statistics to be on your side. I like that the example tries to force you to choose whether you would rather be a garrisoner or a raider, and that both options feel emotionally available, i.e, most Americans are not pre-committed to be loyal to one side or the other. I’m concerned, though, that there are just so many inferential steps there that the audience won’t quite get the message.
Either way, go give this talk, and let us know how it goes!
I hope you give the talk, and that it goes well!
For whatever it’s worth, I think your strongest example is the NY firetrucks (because it makes the audience feel a little bit silly...silly enough to want to remember to do it the right way, but not so silly as to be humiliated), and your weakest example is the Chinese garrison. Unless you’ve recently seen Mulan or whatever, it’s tricky to empathize with a Chinese garrison, and it’s certainly not funny. I would see if you can find another, more light-hearted example to get across the idea of wanting statistics to be on your side. I like that the example tries to force you to choose whether you would rather be a garrisoner or a raider, and that both options feel emotionally available, i.e, most Americans are not pre-committed to be loyal to one side or the other. I’m concerned, though, that there are just so many inferential steps there that the audience won’t quite get the message.
Either way, go give this talk, and let us know how it goes!