search

Multiple Comparisons Fallacy

(Also Known As: the look-elsewhere effect)

Description: In inductive arguments, there is always a chance that the conclusion might be false, despite the truth of the premises.  This is often referred to as “confidence level”.  In any given study or poll, there is a confidence level of less than 100%.  If a confidence level is 95%, then one out of 20 similar studies will have a false conclusion.  If you make multiple comparisons, say 20 or more where there is a 95% confidence level, you are likely to get a false comparison.  This becomes a fallacy when that false comparison is seen as significant rather than a statistical probability.

This fallacy can be overcome by proper testing techniques and procedures that are outside the scope of this book.

Logical Form:

Out of N studies, A produced result X and B produced result Y.

Tomorrow’s headlines read, “Studies show Y”.

Example #1:

100 independent studies were conducted comparing brain tumor rates of those who use cell phones to those who don’t.

90 of the tests showed no significant difference in the rates.

5 of the tests showed that cell phone users were more than twice as likely to develop tumors than those who don’t use cell phones.

5 of the tests showed that cell phone users were half as likely to develop tumors than those who don’t use cell phones.

FunTel Mobile’s new ad, “Studies show: Cell phone users are half as likely to develop brain tumors!”

Explanation: Because we did multiple tests, i.e., compared multiple groups, statistically we are likely to get results that fall within the acceptable margin of error.  These must be disregarded as anomalies or tested further, but not taken to be meaningful while ignoring the other results.

Example #2:

In our study, we looked at 100 individuals who sang right before going to bed, and 100 individuals who did not sing.  Here is what we found: Over 90% of the individuals who sang slept on their backs, and just 10% slept on their stomachs or sides.  This is compared to 50% of those who did not sing, sleeping on their backs and 50% sleeping on their stomachs or sides.  Therefore, singing has something to do with sleeping position.

Explanation: What this study did not report, is that over 500 comparisons were done between the two groups, on everything from quality of sleep to what they ate for breakfast the next day.  Out of all the comparisons, most were meaningless, thus were discarded—but as expected via the law statistics and probability, there were some anomalies, the sleeping position being the most dramatic. 

Exception: Only proper testing and accurate representation of the results would lead to non-fallacious conclusions.

References:

Walsh, J. (1996). True Odds: How Risk Affects Your Everyday Life. Silver Lake Publishing.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Become a Logical Fallacy Master: Enroll in Dr. Bo's Mastering Logical Fallacies Online Course

This is a crash course, meant to catapult you into a world where you start to see things how they really are, not how you think they are. The focus of this course is on logical fallacies, which loosely defined, are simply errors in reasoning.

Significantly Improve the Way You Reason and Make Decisions

  • Learn how to recognize bad arguments
  • Be able to articulate why an argument is bad
  • Learn important details on over 100 of the most common logical fallacies
View the Course Website for Full Details and Introduction Video