Quotes About Analysis

Storytelling doesn't replace analytical thinking," he says. "It supplements it by enabling us to imagine new perspectives and new worlds…. Abstract analysis is easier to understand when seen through the lens of a well-chosen story."5 Now Denning is spreading his message—and telling his story—to organizations worldwide.

2016 study looked at more than eight hundred workers (mostly in information technology, education

Because of their difficulty analyzing the particulars, they became adept at recognizing the patterns.

Critical thinking is an active and ongoing process. It requires that we all think like Bayesians, updating our knowledge as new information comes in.

You can also enter RxList.com into Alexa.com, a free data mining and analysis service

Just because someone quotes you a statistic or shows you a graph, it doesn't mean it's relevant to the point they're trying to make. It's the job of all of us to make sure we get the information that matters, and to ignore the information that doesn't.

asking ourselves these three questions—why, what, and how

When you analyze happiness, it turns out that the way you spend your time is extremely important.

To derive the most useful information from multiple sources of evidence, you should always try to make these sources independent of each other.

The most effortful forms of slow thinking are those that require you to think fast.

To understand error in judgment, we must understand both bias and noise.

The prominence of causal intuitions is a recurrent theme in this book because people are prone to apply causal thinking inappropriately, to situations that require statistical reasoning.

Researchers who pick too small a sample leave themselves at the mercy of sampling luck.

A still image attracts the viewer with an overall impact, then reveals smaller details upon further study.

We want to give deep insight into sports at all levels and bring the viewer inside the journey for an entirely new perspective.

As a pundit, it's important to tell the viewer something they might not know, be unbiased and not sit on the fence.

As a reader and as a viewer, usually when I watch a movie, I'm caught up enough in the movie that I'm not breaking it down to the details anyway.

The need to look behind the curtain is great for a filmmaker. But whether you want to deconstruct what you like as a viewer, what you like and don't like, I wish we could let films stand on their own a little bit.

I believe our editorial decisions reflected our constant desire to make sure that we fully cover and analyze any issue and give our viewers all the information they need.

We're journalists, so our default position is we're not writing editorial. We're trying to bring information to readers, viewers, so that they can make up their own conclusions.

You can Google how many goals a player has scored in the last few seasons, or against this particular side, but our job is to point the viewers to something that is happening in the game that they may not have seen or thought of.

Reducing everything immediately to good and evil is bad history - not only because it isn't true, but because reductionism is unpersuasive; it is boring. Good history, on the other hand, demands that one talk socratically - that one can present alternate viewpoints, not strawman arguments.

It serves anyone, when they're going into some project, to try to distance themselves from the material so you can really have an objective viewpoint.

I think having an outsider's viewpoint is interesting and good, especially for a comedian.