The Jazz Sushi Survey
29/08/2010 6 Comments
When I was just a young rabbit, I was taken, as a treat, to see the National Youth Jazz Orchestra who happened to be playing in my village. It was an epiphany and I was transfixed. Never in my life had I imagined music could be made so utterly awful. Equally shocking was that a good many people around me seemed to be enjoying it, and not just a little bit either. A ginger man a couple of seats away with his eyes closed looked for all the world like he was having an orgasm for the entire concert and for all I know he was.
Years later, I was having a pint with a mate in our local pub, The King of Toss, near Marble Arch. Above the King of Toss was a restaurant to which neither of us had paid any attention in the years since we’d been drinking there. Seemingly no one else had been paying it any attention because on that night a member of the waiting staff came into the pub with a plate of sushi, offering free samples in a bid to entice some drinkers upstairs. So I tried some. This, ladies and gentlemen, was my second epiphany. Never in my life had I imagined food could be made so utterly awful. How could it possibly have been that bad? After all, I like rice, I like fish. In fact given the same ingredients I could probably have made something quite nice. This was anything but. The rice has a texture like it had been cooked the day before, left in the pan to dry then scraped off. It was topped with little red things which seemed to have been sprayed with essence of unwashed genitalia and it was wrapped in one of those unbreakable plastic ribbons that bind up telephone directories. Bizarrely my mate liked it.
At some point in the years since, it occurred to me that I thought about jazz and sushi in pretty much the same way. Not simply in my dislike for them but in the way that I just didn’t get them. I knew plenty of people who were enjoying these pleasures and I would never be able to understand why.
I don’t like Crufts but I can understand why people like it. They get to see the most classically beautiful dogs all standing in a row. I just prefer dogs when they’re fetching sticks and eating slippers but that’s just my preference and I understand theirs.
Jazz and sushi were incomprehensible to me though and the more I thought about it, the more I wondered if these two seemingly unconnected things were in fact connected through people’s preferences. i.e. was there a correlation between people who liked jazz and people who liked sushi? Were these two things completely unrelated or was there a disproportionately high proportion of us who liked both or disliked both compared with the proportion of people who liked one or the other?
This previously unidentified correlation has been an untested theory of mine in the years since but then came Twitter and suddenly I had the perfect opportunity to test it out.
Last week I asked people two Yes/No questions:
- Do you like jazz?
- Do you like sushi?
And thanks to those who responded and retweeted it I ended up with 112 responses.
And so to the numbers. Firstly, I worked out the proportion of people who like jazz and the proportion of people who like sushi. The results were:
Using these numbers, I worked out my ‘null hypothesis’. i.e. what the results would be if there is no correlation.
i.e. of the 112 respondents, if there is no correlation between liking jazz and liking sushi then the proportion of people who like sushi and like jazz is:
112 x (64.6% x 54.87%) = 40.41 people.
Then I compared this with what the 112 people actually said:
Interesting… there are more people in the like both and like neither than there should be if the null hypothesis is true. Sure enough when I calculated the correlation it came out at 0.17.
Correlation is expressed as a number between -1 and 1. A correlation of 1 means that the correlation is perfect i.e. for me to get a correlation of 1 everybody who liked sushi would have to like jazz and everybody who disliked sushi would have to dislike jazz. A correlation of -1 represents a perfect negative correlation. In my case this would have meant that everyone who liked jazz disliked sushi and everyone who disliked jazz liked sushi. A correlation of 0 would mean there was no correlation at all between the data. My correlation looked like this:
So I had a correlation and better still it was a positive one, but although my figures had a correlation could it just have been I got lucky?
To determine this I needed to work out what the probability of this happening by chance would be if the null hypothesis were true.
I decided to use a fairly standard way of testing significance – that the probability of such an outcome would have to be less than or equal to 1 in 20. i.e. if there is no correlation then results as convincing as mine could come up no more than 1 in every 20 repeats of such an experiment – a significance level of 0.05.
Therefore, if the probability of my set of results coming up is greater than 0.05 then the probability of it having happened by chance is too great, my correlation is not significant and my results are inconclusive. If the probability is less than 0.05 then the chances of this having happened by chance are negligible and my correlation is statistically significant.
Are you ready? Drum roll, please. The probability of a correlation as pronounced as mine having happened by chance is……..0.045!!
That’s right, I really did it. I really did find a correlation between liking jazz and liking sushi. The theory I have held for ages has at last been proven.
I am not going to call it RedEaredRabbit’s Law. After all it is too important to be just mine – it should belong to all of us. I am instead going to call it Cole’s Law. (Nothing to do with Cole Porter – I’ve just always wanted to call a law that.)
At some point I’ll explain why my method of gathering the data wasn’t perfect but for now I’m just going to bask in my glory.
RedEaredRabbit
P.S. I didn’t mean to imply that jazz and sushi were awful in absolute terms. Just that I dislike them and am personally unable to appreciate them. Don’t lynch me, please.
P.P.S. Please also read the follow up post to this survey here.
I see some problems in your hypothesis. Jazz covers a myriad of styles, some of which I loathe (eg trad jazz). Similar with sushi. I’m not really sure what real sushi is. If it’s only raw fish then I hate it and I’ve ruined your figures.
Having said all that, I love your statistical work and I’m pleased you have discovered Cole’s Law.
Hello. You are absolutely right, of course. I asked for a yes/no answer to two questions which were not really a simple yes/no for most people. It was all for a bit of fun though.
2 problems: first, I consider “jazz” such a ridiculously wide subject matter that you almost might as well have asked “do you like music?” I mean Albert Ayler and Jamie Cullum both fall under that heading.
Second, and more methodological I suppose, self selecting sample, innit? I’m passionately for (some) jazz, and love sushi, so am more likely to vote than someone who is more ambivalent about either. Distorts the results.
Excellent! My note about the way in which I selected the data was less than perfect was referring exactly to the self-selecting sample.
Also, yes as I replied above – the survey asked for simple yes/no answers to questions which are not that simple so leave a huge amount open to interpretation.
I was in fact planning to write a followup to explain these and show how easily polls can be misleading.
Pingback: And Now A Small Confession… « Musings of a Red Eared Rabbit
Pingback: Politicians & Petitions « Musings of a Red Eared Rabbit