So something around the 10% mark seems accurate.

When you get to the 5%-10% range statistical noise becomes nasty.

But yeah, that is kinda deceptive if the data provided says 7% and the chart uses 10%.

this is what went viral

total fake news

That's really bad.

the creator made a graph of 1000 men

but then the % were bsaed on 100

so she cut a full order of magnitude from the actual visual

Do you know the source of the viral graphic?

its on the bottom of the graphic

That's really deceptive.

yuuuup

and when called out

she went

"its a conversation starter"

even the link on the graph disproves her claims

it was meant to look official

The usual excuse.

but no one will type out that url from the graphic

Went looking. Here's the first hit I found on Bing.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/01/08/the_enliven_project_s_false_rape_accusations_infographic_great_intentions.html

Note the date. This apparently got debunked in 2013.

The Enliven project looks to me like an activists' blog.

Tim, I found this piece about the 2%-8% stat https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/how-common-are-false-rape-charges-really-jason-richwine/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc

he warned us

and its only getting worse

and will only get worse

I think confirmation bias and the like has been known forever though.

And it's just as bad--if not worse--in places like Academia.

In the case of theenlivenproject, it appears to have changed to a YouTube channel and a new blog.

It looks much more professional, but appears to be the same person spearheading it all.

https://theuncomfortableconversation.org/

That's an interesting National Review article. Should be relatively straightforward to confirm if one has the data. And far more relevant to the Ford-Kavanaugh case than it may initially look given that the prosecutor the Republicans hired didn't think she could even get a search warrant.

It actually could be spun both ways by both parties too.

I don't get the obsession about the rate of false accusations anyway

It should always be a case to case basis, with the bases that the accused in innocent until proven guilty

The rate at which something happens should be entirely irrelevant

In terms of resource allocation or deciding what's a "worthwhile problem" good stats on the occurrence of these things do matter.

In principle you're correct, but in practice you often have to weigh resources and things.

In terms of #MeToo, if you can show that false accusations don't really happen, it makes for an easier argument that you don't need to actually go through the effort of proving the allegations carefully.

Which is what the "sexual assault" groups want