In many presentations I have observed a tendency to overwhelm (and impress?) the audience by complex analyses and unclear visualizations. But is it always necessary to have highest #complexity? Sometimes even to a degree, where the presenter has difficulties to understand and to explain the full approach? I am a fan of the KISS-approach – Keep it simple, but scientific! The complexity comes in automatically; but you should always start as simple as possible and meaningful. And then you can develop your method step by step and increase complexity as needed. But not the other way round and start (without need) with the most complex approach. But please don’t get me wrong: Complexity is not a bad thing – but only if it is needed in the specific situation. And only if you care about the assumptions needed for applying complex analyses. KISS can be applied for all analyses, statistical figures, presentations, publications, etc. When did you try this approach the last time?
Richard Feymann (Nobel Prize-winning physicist and science communicator) said that to fully understand a science topic, you should be able to explain it to a child. Communicating appropriately to the level of the audience is a rare skill.
I am working on a manuscript and having difficulties in telling a interesting idea about my motivation for the research work. Thank you for sharing KISS approach! I definitely will be using it for my research and manuscript!
So true ! Mark Jaros Frank Freischläger 🙂
Principal Biostatistician at ICON
11moGlad to know I'm not the only statistician that is a fan of Occam's razor :D