Useful Data

But is the information useful, monkey? Is it?!
(source)

In a recent attempt to "cheat" with science while creating a March Madness bracket, I rediscovered the online data-geek candy store FiveThirtyEighty.com, brain child of renowned statistician Nate Silver.  In another incredible display of sexy stats, Silver and Company have assembled a robust statistical model of the NCAA men's basketball tournament, adding evidence to the thesis that the geeks shall inherit the earth.

While the information on FiveThiryEight is beautifully presented and likely as accurate as one will get, I began to wonder: is this useful? More broadly, what makes information useful?

I don't want to get too hung up on what "useful" means, but for my purposes I'd like to define useful as enabling better performance: greater accuracy, greater speed, or higher success rates in some activity.  What feature of data would make it useful?

Here's my opinion: for information to be useful, it must be actionable.  In other words, for information to enable better performance or higher success rates it must inform what actions should, or should not be performed to improve accuracy.

A great example of this type of information for me has been heart rate data during exercise.  When I run according to my heart rate training plan, I know that I'm working too hard on my easy day when my heart rate goes above some threshold.  This is actionable information.  My heart rate is too high so I change my behavior and slow down.

For the FiveThirtyEighty March Madness predictions, the information is sort of actionable.  The FiveThirtyEight bracket is structured as probabilities of a team winning at each stage of the tournament.  This information is useful if I'm betting on a game (i.e. which team is likely to win) but isn't useful if I'm trying to make a bracket (i.e. which teams are most likely to be in each slot of the bracket).

The lesson here is that the structure of the information should match the decision to be made.  In the example of my hear rate data, my current heart rate is only useful in the context of a threshold.  I must know how my current data point relates to some useful scale.  Only then can I take action to bring my individual measure back into range.

However, generating actionable data is incredibly complicated because it requires a solid understanding of the mechanisms that explain a phenomenon.  In the case of heart rate training, heart rate is a well-established proxy for intensity and systematically modulating intensity is important to balance improvements in fitness against risk for injury.   Creating actionable data is also complicated by the need to understand how it will be used (i.e. betting on a game vs. making a bracket).  For these reasons, generating data without a solid theory to back up action is no better than rock collecting.

A related piece on FiveThirtyEight highlights an interview with White House Chief Data Scientist, Dr. D.J. Patel.   A topic of discussion that caught my attention was that of "Data Products" which Dr. Patel explains as "How do you use data to do something really beneficial?"  The true obstacle to creating powerful data products (the dream of Big Data) isn't access to data or data processing tools as these are now as ubiquitous  as the internet and the personal computer, respectively.  Instead, the obstacle to data products, or "useful data" as I'm calling it, is creating a solid theory about the mechanism driving a phenomenon.  Without this understanding, data remains noise.

For these reasons, while I am as enamored by sexy data as much as the next dork, I am reminded about the need for good scientific theories that allow us to interpret and structure sexy data in a way that makes it useful.  That is the real challenge for data scientists in the age of big data.

My gut tells me to trust my gut

My gut says: trust your gut!

Is there an optimal strategy for making a big decision?  Should we trust our intuition (our "gut") or should we engage in some methodical, step-wise approach?  You know, writing out the pros and cons.

I care right now because I'm trying to make a big decision: what do I want to do with my life?  Yikes.  So, yeah, I'm interested in learning a bit about how to tackle this.

I stumbled upon research suggesting conscious thought is better in some contexts while intuitive decision-making is better in others.  For example, check out this tidbit on decision-making.  In that example, the conclusion was that experts performed best when they relied on unconscious thinking.  Also, it sounds like expertise became less useful to expert decision-makers when they engaged in a conscious decision making process.

Hmm.  So what does that mean for me?  Here's what my gut tells me to do... When making this very complex decision I will engage in four steps:

1. Collect shit-loads of information - In essence, my goal is to actually become an expert on the topic that relates to the decision.  What are all the variables?  Pros, cons? List 'em out and learn them all.  Gather as much information as possible about the decision and feed it to my brain like some giant super-computer (which is sort of is).  But don't decide immediately.

2. Sleep on it - Next, I let all that information percolate through my nervous system.  It will create new connections and recognize patterns.  I will not be consciously aware of most of this.  Also, getting more sleep will speed the process along and help with fidelity.

3. Repeat as long as possible - Every decision has a timeline.  I will repeat the info-gathering and sleeping steps for as long as possible.  How long can I reasonably delay making the decision?  That may be a decision too, so fold that into the larger decision-making process and keep repeating for as long as is reasonable.

4. Trust my gut - Finally, once I've spent as much time as possible considering all the variables, I will trust my gut.  At the end of that time, my super-computer-like brain will print out a small slip of paper (essentially a fortune cookie) and I will do what it says.

Why does this make sense?  Here's my philosophy: the "conscious" part of our brain is a very tiny part of our brain.  Also, it's evolutionarily new and isn't very good at multitasking.  However, our brain has a lot of processing power that goes on behind the scenes and which contributes to all our decisions and actions.  We ignore all that parallel processing at great risk.

Also, big decisions are very complicated and require an understanding of a lot of moving parts.  While our conscious mind is a shitty multitasker, our brain at-large is great at multitasking (think driving and talking on the phone).  Why not exploit that?

So, that's the plan.  Hopefully it's a good decision...

Week of Calm

According to Google Image Search,
this is a "Calm Monkey"

Emotions are cool, right?  I mean, they make us feel all weird, sometimes good, sometimes bad.   Occasionally, they come out of nowhere.  They make our bodies do strange stuff: flush, feel tight, feel warm, put butterflies places.  Those are all incredible experiences.  However, that doesn't mean we need to let everyone else in the world know how we're feeling right?

Hence, The Happy Homunculus has sponsored a Week of Calm.  A whole week dedicated to regulating our adult temper-tantrums.  It was a trip!  If you missed out, here it is again:

Week of Calm

Day 1: Feeling - Strange vibrations.
Day 2: Commute of Calm - Drive happy.
Day 3: Cool Off - Get out of there.
Day 4: Poker Face - No tells.
Day 5: Turn the Other Cheek - Empathy, big time.
Day 6: Off the Brakes - Let it out.

Next week, The Happy Homunculus is going to be all about my second favorite thing in the world: sleeping.  I'm going to cobble together a bunch of Daily Mind Games that are going to be soporific to the extreme.  Metacognitive control isn't just about analyzing our own thinking, it's about giving our brain what it needs and craves.  Like some rest.  And I need some rest.

Until then, why not check out the following fun links for some extra credit.  I'd like to make it a weekly habit to share the recent articles that make Homunky the happiest...

Homunky's Hot Hits:

First off, it's always good to get a refresher on what metacognition is all about.  And if that wasn't enough, check out this article for more.

Next up, here is a recent article from the prolific Jonah Leher about making decisions.  It reminded me that it's not always smart to over-think things!  Hungry for more decision-making research?  Here's another article discussing the relative value of emotions and intentional thinking when making decisions. Cool!

Finally, here's a recent piece about memory that reminds me a lot of our discussions during the Week of Memory.  Some good tips there for making concepts stick.