Tuesday, September 19, 2017

How much of Scott Mautz’s discussion of a survey on fears should you take seriously – some or none?















On September 12, 2017 there was an article by Scott Mautz at the Inc. web site titled 11 Famous failures that will inspire you to success. (It also appeared the next day as a post on his blog. And it is on page 28 in the Google Books preview of his Find the Fire: Ignite Your Inspiration – and Make Work Exciting Again). He began with a startling statistic about fear of failure: 

“Nothing debilitates us as much or is as scary as a fear of failure.

In fact, research indicates that our fear of failure tops the list of our phobias with nearly one in three people having a fear of failure (31 percent), ahead of our fear of public speaking or fear of spiders (30 percent each) or even our fear of the paranormal (15 percent).

A close fifth was our fear of another Transformers movie being made.”


The last one is obviously meant to be humorous, but the others seemed serious. I didn’t recall seeing those numbers before, so I clicked on his link for that research, which led me to a press release from October 14, 2015 titled Research reveals fear of failure has us all shaking in our boots this Halloween. It said that Linkagoal had a survey of 1,083 American adults done by the commercial polling firm YouGov. The press release talked about fears, not phobias. Back on October 11, 2011 I blogged about What’s the difference between a fear and a phobia? That press release listed the percentages shown in the following bar chart:























Compare them with Scott’s Top Five list:



















His begins with fear of failure (31%) rather than fear of horror films (32%). He also adds fear of public speaking (30%).  

I try to get detailed results from a survey, so I searched on Google but couldn’t find them for Linkagoal. Instead I found a blog post titled What scares us most: spiders or failing? Linkagoal’s Fear Factor Index clears the cobwebs that showed an infographic with another top five fears list with horror movies first (but that added fear of flying at 20%):


 
I emailed Scott Mautz as follows:

Scott:



How did you decide that fear of failure tops the list? The press release about research you linked to in your second paragraph instead says it was fear of horror films. And, it says nothing about fear of public speaking, so where did you find that 30% statistic?



An infographic in a blog post from Linkagoal lists the Top 5 Most Scariest Things, which were: Horror movies - 32%, Failure - 31%, Spiders - 30%, Flying - 20%, and Ghosts -  15%. Public speaking isn’t on that list either.



Richard Garber

He replied:

Hi Richard-

thx for taking the time to engage with your question. I should have made it clearer in the article that the top fears we humans have comes from a cross section of a number of sources, not just the one I linked to. Also, important to note that what humans find scary and what they have a fear of are two different things.  For example, for certain watching scary movies is very scary to adults.  But it does not rank at the top for what humans are afraid of- they are not afraid of watching scary movies- they're afraid of failing.  Hope this helps. 



Scott 

Based on that evasive and condescending reply, I don’t think ANY of Scott’s discussion of the Linkagoal survey should be taken seriously. How fears rank can be stated either as what more people fear (like Scott did, in units of percent) or in terms of what people fear more (on a scale from say one to ten, via something psychologists call a fear survey scale). Back on October 23, 2012 I blogged about how Either way you look at it, public speaking really is not our greatest fear. That post linked to another one from October 13, 2012 titled In a 1992 study of U.S. university students, fear of public speaking ranked sixth for men and eighth for women. In that study fear of failure really was ranked first. 


Monday, September 18, 2017

Please spare a few moments to take Dave Paradi’s survey on Annoying PowerPoint
























Every two years Dave Paradi does a survey about what things in PowerPoint presentations annoys people. Please take a few minutes to fill out his current one, which is here until September 24.

On September 11, 2017 at Indezine Geetesh Bajaj blogged about The Annoying PowerPoint Survey: Conversation with Dave Paradi.  

I discussed results from his last survey in a November 3, 2015 blog post titled Dave Paradi’s 2015 Annoying PowerPoint Survey again found the most common annoyance was speakers reading their slides, and earlier ones in a June 10, 2015 blog post titled Don’t annoy us by reading your PowerPoint slides.

The image was modified from one titled 3 minutes intermission while changing pictures found at the Library of Congress.

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Please avoid clichés, like What gets me out of bed in the morning…





















Chapter 26 of the May 2017 book Al Franken, Giant of the Senate is titled What Gets Me out of Bed in the Morning. He laments that a lot of people in the government keep telling us things like:

“What gets me out of bed in the morning is making sure our veterans have good jobs.”



“What gets me out of bed in the morning is seeing to it that every child in America has a world-class education.”



“What gets me out of bed in the morning is doing everything I can to see that our electric grid is secure.”

Al Franken says instead that what gets him out of bed just is having to pee. Me too!

He also laments clichés like:

“…robust letters calling for robust funding to ensure (another cliché) a robust response to a pressing (ugh) problem.”

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

The De-jargonizer – a tool for communicating science clearly






















Recently I saw a brief article about a computer program called the De-jargonizer for identifying jargon. Details are described in a magazine article by Tzipora Rakedzon, Elad Segev, Noam Chapnik, Roy Yosef and Ayelet Baram-Tsaba titled Automatic jargon identifier for scientists engaging with the public and science communication educators which appeared in PLOS ONE in February 2017.  




















I tried it out on the ending of a speech by President Donald Trump on tax reform from August 30, 2017 with the results shown above. Program instructions say:

“Results are displayed both by color and by percentage. Words in black are common words, words in orange are mid-frequency words, and words in red are jargon. The table on the right presents the number of words in the text and the results: the number of words and the percentage of words for each frequency (high, mid and jargon).”

This isn’t the only tool. Back on September 21, 2013 I blogged about Funneling your big ideas through a small vocabulary and discussed the Up-Goer Five Text Editor.

The illustration really shows a wool picker from an old Scientific American magazine.

Monday, September 11, 2017

If you value your lives, be somewhere else


That was governor Rick Scott’s properly serious crisis communication message last week, as discussed on September 8th in an ABC news article titled Florida governor urges residents ahead of Hurricane Irma: ‘You’ve got to get out; you can’t wait.

Contrast his message with one from talk radio personality Rush Limbaugh, who on September 5th instead ranted about My Analysis of the Hurricane Irma Panic. By September 8th instead the Washington Post reported Rush Limbaugh indicates he’s evacuating Palm Beach days after suggesting Hurricane Irma is fake news. Yesterday Politifact discussed his statements and their implications in an article titled In context: what Rush Limbaugh said about Hurricane Irma before evacuation.

He’s gotten negative publicity from halfway around the world. Today Callum Borchers had an article in the Sydney Morning Herald titled Rush Limbaugh evacuates Palm Beach days after suggesting that Hurricane Irma is fake news. Meanwhile from Los Angeles Mr. Limbaugh whined about how it was One of the greatest smears of my career.

My title came from the punch line of a speech from the science fiction television series Babylon 5.

Sunday, September 10, 2017

Not everything a world champion says is a pearl of wisdom











On August 25, 2017, in Vancouver, Manoj Vasudevan won the 2017 World Championship of Public Speaking with his speech Pull Less, Bend More. Toastmasters International put out a news release and a 3-minute highlights YouTube video clip. Later they put out a video of the whole speech.


There is an unfortunate tendency to treat everything the champ says as an unquestionable pearl of wisdom. But back on February 17, 2017 I took him to task with a blog post on Bursting a hilariously overblown claim that 99% of the world fears public speaking.

Thursday, September 7, 2017

Three main dimensions and four questionable quadrants for vocal variety


If you don’t put some variety into your speaking voice, then your audience will get bored and fall asleep. Two YouTube video examples from movies illustrate how much difference vocal variety can make.

In Ferris Bueller’s Day Off Ben Stein plays a high school economics teacher who calls the roll with a boring monotone drone. His student’s replies of “here” convey way more emotion than anything he does.

Contrast that with Meg Ryan who plays Sally in When Harry Met Sally. In the famous delicatessen scene she puts a load of emotion into the word “yes.”


Rate, volume, and pitch are three main dimensions of vocal variety.
















But rate, volume and pitch may appear under other names, typically all beginning with the letter p, as a silly organizational device.  

Rate (or pace) can range from slow as molasses to faster than an auctioneer. The December 2016 issue of Toastmaster magazine had a brief unindexed Advice from the Pros article by Bill Brown titled Don’t Race the Pace. On July 31, 2017 Gavin Meikle had a longer article titled Vocal Variety Tip Part 2 – Perfect Your Pace. On September 1, 2017 September 1, 2017 Christian O. Lundberg had an article at at Pinnacle Persuasion titled Speech myths busted: Speed kills? Or, what is the best rate for a compelling presentation.

Volume (intensity, loudness, power, projection) can range from a whisper to a shout. The March 2017 issue of Toastmaster had another article by Bill Brown titled The Most Common Technique – Volume. On July 18, 2017 Gavin Meikle had another article titled
Six Elements of Vocal Variety and How to Master Them Part 1 – Volume.

Pitch (frequency) can range from low to high. In the February 2017 issue of Toastmaster Bill Brown had an article on Reading a Prepared Text that suggested adding pitch up or down markings. On September 5, 2017 Gavin Meikle had an article titled Vocal variety tips, part 3 – pitch and resonance.

The May 2014, issue of Toastmaster has a two-page article by Craig Harrison on Hearing Voices (use characters, personas, puppets and animal sounds to boost your vocal variety.

The Toastmasters International basic manual on Competent Communication covers vocal variety in the sixth speech project. Andrew Dlugan discussed it on November 1, 2009 in a post at his Six Minutes blog on Toastmasters Speech 6: Vocal Variety. Toastmasters International covers vocal variety in their very detailed manual on Your Speaking Voice (Item 199, 22 page pdf).

The National Communication Association has a 49 page pdf document called
The Competent Speaker Speech Evaluation Form  2nd Edition 2007. Vocal variety is one of eight competencies considered in their evaluation:

“Competency Six: Uses vocal variety in rate, pitch, & intensity (volume) to heighten & maintain interest appropriate to the audience & occasion.”
    
Songs provide great examples of vocal variety, like the soaring electropop of Something Just Like This. Using vocal variety also can spice up a potentially boring subject like a weather forecast. The National Weather Service has an eight-minute YouTube video by Brooke Bingaman on Creating Vocal Variety.  


Four questionable quadrants for vocal variety





































In Chapter 11 of his 2014 book, How to Deliver a TED Talk, Jeremy Donovan showed a chart with four quadrants for rate and volume. But he didn’t provide a reference for its source. Back on November 11, 2010 Rory Vaden had a blog post at Southwestern Consulting on 4 Voice Quadrants.with some different titles. A November 21, 2011 article by Cal Habig on Vocal variety in preaching: an important part of influence discussed Vaden’s blog post with a four-slice pie chart.  

Sunday, September 3, 2017

When you hook an outdated and misstated statistic onto a completely bogus one, you get a new myth















 


At LinkedIn Pulse on August 18, 2017 there was an article by D. John Carlson (Skeptic and Strategist) titled 74% experience speech anxiety that also was posted on his web site.  

It began by claiming that:

“A survey of 5.3 million Americans found that 74% suffer from speech anxiety.”

Both those numbers actually came from the Fear of Public Speaking Statistics web page at Statistic Brain. 74% is listed for Percent of people who suffer from speech anxiety, but 5.3 million is listed for Number of Americans who have a social phobia.

In a blog post on July 15, 2012 titled Another bogus statistic on the fear of public speaking I noted that the 5.3 million just was an outdated statistic. In another blog post on December 7, 2014 titled Statistic Brain is just a statistical medicine show I noted that the 74% was bogus, and it didn’t come from the National Institute of Mental Health as was claimed. There never was a colossal survey of 5.3 million Americans.

Mr. Carlson’s About web page claims that he:

“is well known for debunking myths, testing assumptions, questioning intuition and distinguishing fact from fiction – delivering the benefits of objective, critical at lateral thinking to maximise return on investment.”

But this time he wasn’t skeptical at all. Instead he created a new myth.

Saturday, September 2, 2017

Do you really need to crush your presentation?






















Their authors apparently think I would use their meaning for the word crush – to subdue completely. But the mental image I get is of the mortar and pestle shown above – since I instead first think of crush as to reduce to particles by pounding or grinding. Logitech probably didn’t imagine their remote being used as a pestle, but I did.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary web page for the transitive verb crush lists the following five meanings:

1] a) to squeeze by force or pressure so as to alter or destroy structure.  
1] b) to squeeze together into a mass.

2] to hug or embrace.

3] to reduce to particles by pounding or grinding.

4] a) to suppress or overwhelm as if by pressure or weight.
4] b) to oppress or burden grievously.
4] c) to sudue completely.

5] to crowd or push.

Watch what words you put in the title of your speech, article or blog post.

Thursday, August 31, 2017

How NOT to display data - in a qualitative pyramid chart



At the D. John Carlson web site I found an article from August 31, 2017 titled 48.2% take 1 – 3 hours which also appeared at LinkedIn Pulse. It began:

“Research in the United States has found that there is significant variability in the time that bloggers take to craft high quality content. Headline findings were as follows:

1 hour –  7.7%

1-2 hours – 24.7%

2-3 hours – 23.5%

3-4 hours – 19%

4-6 hours – 13.3%

6+ hours – 11.9%”
Mr. Carlson’s article referred to but did not bother to provide a link to the FitSmallBusiness web site.


























A search revealed that information came from a July 22, 2017 article at FitSmallBusiness by Henry Kanapi titled 15 Business Blogging Statistics That You Should Know. Number 8 was how long does it usually take to write an average blog post? Results were displayed in the qualitative pyramid chart shown above. But widths of the rows are unrelated to the percent for each time period. Also, heights of the rows are not constant, and the colors orange, yellow, and blue are repeated for no obvious reason. So, this idiotic graphic is neither meaningful nor pretty.

That data reportedly came from Statistica, which expects you to pay to see them. But those results really came from a 2016 survey done by Orbit Media Studios that was reported in a blog post by Andy Crestodina titled New Research:  3rd Annual Survey of 1000+ Bloggers (time, length, and tactics).

































As shown above, that blog post reports more interesting and useful results for 2014, 2015, and 206 on both the average time for writing a blog post (hours), and the average length (words). In 2016 the average time was 3.27 hours and the average length was 1054 words. How else might we display those six percentages that appeared on that pyramid chart?





















One possibility is via a standard horizontal bar chart, as is shown above.
























Another is via a horizontal bar chart showing the cumulative percentages, as shown above. From it we could see that slightly over half (55.9%) of blog posts took 3 hours or less, and almost exactly 3/4 (74.9%) took 4 hours or less.

If you want to tell people something interesting and useful, then you need to get back to the original source for data rather than settling for a secondary one.



Wednesday, August 30, 2017

An event that will not soon be eclipsed





















On the morning of August 21, 2017 I watched the total solar eclipse from near the tee of the third hole of a golf course in Cascade, Idaho that was closed for the morning. That location was picked by an astronomer, my brother-in-law Antony Stark, who is shown at the left in the above image. Our party of eight paid $10 each for armbands. Viewing conditions were perfect, without significant cloud cover or smoke. I’d brought along a homemade wooden Safe Solar Viewer that projected an image of the sun onto a white-painted surface (see yellow arrow).     

















We’d also brought my 60-mm spotting scope, to which Tony had added a filter so we could look at sunspots before the eclipse started. He also had a pair of binoculars with a solar filter. We all had viewing glasses too. Seeing the sun completely covered by the moon for two minutes was amazing. Experiencing the sky going dark and the temperature dropping significantly were way more impressive than I’d expected based on reading about them. Phil Plait has a pair of articles that discuss watching the eclipse - When the moon ate the sun and Standing under the shadow of the moon: thoughts on totality.  


     























My Safe Solar Viewer had a pair of lenses bought from Surplus Shed as a kit for $5. It took me $10 worth of ½” x 3-1/2” pine lumber, and about an hour of woodworking with a miter box and hand drill to assemble it. We wound up looking at the magnified projected image more than through our viewing glasses.  

My wife Elaine had begun planning this trip two years earlier. She had rented a cabin near the lake. Back then we thought we’d be watching from one of the Lake Cascade State Park campsites or day-use areas further south along Lakeshore Drive. Six of us drove 75 miles up from Boise on Saturday in an SUV and a minivan. The other two arrived on Sunday from near Stanley. On Wednesday we drove back the long way back to Boise via Banks, Lowman, Stanley, Sun Valley, and Twin Falls. At the visitor’s center in Twin Falls we saw a couple of base jumpers parachute off the Perrine Bridge and land on the south bank of the Snake River.   

I’ve crossed seeing a total eclipse off my bucket list. The next one is in 2024, and perhaps we’ll see it down in Texas.

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Shouldn’t you live your life thoughtfully?




























An article by Dr. Ivan Misner on August 24, 2017 (with Alex Mandossian) was titled Discover Your Verb, and subtitled with an artificial grammatical choice - You can live your life three ways: as a Noun, an Adjective, or as a Verb!

Sorry, but I don’t like being sentenced to just one of those three. I’m much happier living as the Adverb thoughtfully.

There are lots of positive adverbs from a list of a hundred: boldly bravely, brightly, cheerfully, deftly, deliberately, devotedly, eagerly, faithfully, gleefully, gracefully, happily, honestly, inquisitively, kindly, merrily, powerfully, seriously, victoriously, vivaciously, warmly.

And there also are lots of negative adverbs to avoid: accidentally, angrily, anxiously, awkwardly, badly, blindly, boastfully, crazily, foolishly, hopelessly, irritably, jealously, lazily, nervously, obnoxiously, poorly, rudely, selfishly, shakily, tediously, wearily.

An image by Billy Hathorn of August Rodin’s famous sculpture The Thinker came from Wikimedia Commons.

Saturday, August 26, 2017

Don’t hang your article from a bogus quotation (and also watch your social network etiquette)

























Back on July 4, 2017 Mr. David Fazio posted a thousand-word article (about his organization Helix Opportunity) on LinkedIn Pulse titled What Makes Us Different. It began:

“Henry Ford once, famously, quipped:

‘If I’d asked what people wanted, they’d have said, ‘ ’faster horses.’ ‘
Look around, and there’s an infitecimal number of ideas being funded every day that are aimed at essentially building faster horses.” 


He didn’t bothered to check that back on July 28, 2011 at Quote Investigator Garson O’Toole had written about My Customers Would Have Asked For a Faster Horse, and found Ford hadn’t really ever said that.

I read Mr. Fazio’s article after he dumped a post and link to it at LinkedIn on The Official Toastmasters International Group (which has almost 30,000 members). That article said nothing about Toastmasters and clearly didn’t belong there, since the About This Group section there says very clearly (my italics):

“Before posting please note that we have the right to remove any user contributed post, for any reason, in our sole discretion. Any posts that are deemed to be unrelated to Toastmasters will be deleted as will members who consistently post unrelated or promotional content.”

The first comment came from a Distinguished Toastmaster who was protective of the group. He rightly asked what does this have to do with Toastmasters?, and ended by proclaiming SPAM! David went off at him in a rant.

I followed by commenting something facetious like that I supposed anything could be viewed as relevant, since it might be considered a speech topic.

David went off at me for a long paragraph, beginning by saying that if I’m not the group owner, and I’m not, then I have no right to judge what belongs on this group, etc., etc. etc.

He also mentioned other recent posts on that group that he claimed were off-topic (but were not), including one put up the the group owner, Social Media Strategist at Toastmasters International. Eventually the group owner deleted the entire thread. Before that happened I had put up a comment on the LinkedIn Pulse article:

“What makes you different is that you didn’t bother either to finish proofreading your text, or to take off the caption at the bottom of your graphic. Infitecimal isn’t a real word, and infinitesimal means an indefinitely small quantity. The right word is enormous.”

David replied that he’d written infitecimal for style and effect - which makes no sense whatsoever.

Curiously, the June 2017 issue of Toastmaster magazine contained an article by Scott Steinberg on pages 14 and 15 titled Social Network Etiquette. David’s combative online behavior violated everything Scott had said in his section on Tone of Voice and Attitude.  

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Spouting Nonsense - No one has ever done a survey that says the number one fear is public speaking

















In an article on August 3, 2017 titled Speech: The Most Dangerous Class Your Student Must Take on the Rock Your Speech Class web site for the Bridges School homeschool collaborative Kim Krajci claimed that:

“No one has ever done a survey that says the number one fear is public speaking. That myth has hung around for a long time.”

That statement is false, so Kim is awarded a pink Spoutly.

Back in April 1973 R. H. Bruskin Associates did such a survey of U.S. adults that was discussed in the London Sunday Times on October 7, 1973 and in the December 1973 issue of Spectra magazine (from the National Communication Association). I blogged about it in the most popular post on this blog back on October 27, 2009 which was titled The 14 Worst Human Fears in the 1977 Book of Lists: where did this data really come from? Two decades later there was another survey by their successor firm, which I discussed on May 19, 2011 in another blog post titled America’s Number One Fear: Public Speaking – that 1993 Bruskin-Goldring Survey.

In yet another post on July 30, 2012 titled Is fear of public speaking the greatest fear in the entire galaxy? I linked to my discussions of fifteen surveys, only five of which had public speaking as the number one fear. A blog post titled America’s Top Fears 2016 discussed how the 2016 Chapman Survey of American Fears ranked public speaking as only number 33 of 79 fears.

The most useful information we can give students instead is about what U.S. adolescents fear. On June 11, 2012 I blogged about What social situations scare American adolescents, and what are their top 20 fears?

Kim’s About web page says she has a BA in Communications and  is a Distinguished Toastmaster (DTM), so I would have expected her to have done a better job of researching fears.