• Vehicles • Fashion • Recipes • Blogs • Hunt • Travels • Sport • Fun • Handmade • IT • Education
Mini-Games
x

x
zakruti.com » Knowledge, science, education » Crash Course
Science Journalism: Crash Course Statistics #11

Science Journalism: Crash Course Statistics #11

FBTwitterReddit

video description

Rating: 4.0; Vote: 1
We-ve talked a lot in this series about how often you see data and statistics in the news and on social media - which is ALL THE TIME! But how do you know who and what you can trust? Today, we-re going to talk about how we, as consumers, can spot flawed studies, sensationalized articles, and just plain poor reporting. And this isn-t to say that all science articles you read on
Date: 2022-04-04

Comments and reviews: 10


Privatelly funded science can be really good, even if it affects the company that funds it, Mario Molina (chemistry Nobel prize from Mexico's National Autonomous University) discovered the relation between tetrafluorocarbons (gas that's used for cooling) and the hole in the ozone layer, and that study was funded by a company that used them, so yeah, that happens
reply

The emphasis on the critical analysis of the funding source is a bit too -breitbart- for my taste.
A biased source of funding doesn't necessarily lead to biased research. As long as the research is carried out by a serious, respectable institution, it frequently doesn't matter where the funding came from

reply

Article: -a study found a mild correlation between ADHD in kids and amount of time they spend playing videogames. This might have to do with the stimulation that games provide. -
Headline: -Kids are being hypnotized by videogames-
(seriously. This was a real thing that I read in an actual newspaper)

reply

Don't leap before you look.
Don't believe what you read in the papers, without doing research.
If they jumped off a cliff would you jump off a cliff too?
Be sceptical but not so sceptical that everything is an illusion made by your own mind, since that is all you can believe.

reply

Funding for science studies isn't neutral in the US, not since Jan 20, 2017 and a bunch of anti-science politicians got put into very powerful positions. Even then it wasn't great. The CDC was prevented from studying gun violence since the research already done upset the NRA.
reply

-_. worse than -text neck- is 'butt callous' from sitting extra-low in the chair all day to avoid ceiling-glare on the computer screen-and-has anybody defined control-group placebos, and done tests to determine the proper types of placebos, e. g. non-digestable L-sugars. _-
reply

I have a question: how can you trust that the data and/or results shown in a paper are legit and not made up?
I guess its not difficult at all to just lie about the measurements or complex calculations made in the study.

reply

only the abstract of a study are usually free, the whole article is for sale. but if the study got filtered by peer-review and scrutiny by the journal editors are these not enough to trust the study?
reply

Regarding chocolate: I lose weight when I eat it because the caffeine and sugar make me hyperactive, and I lose my appetite for real food. But that's just me. I'm a statistical outlier.
reply

when read things and they state correlation
Remember that it does not mean Causation
and go deep, check with much care
for the study may not have been just and fair.

reply
Add a review, comment






Other channel videos