Pop Science

BB
The Open Book
Published in
2 min readDec 12, 2016
https://www.flickr.com/photos/roberlan/7234609618/in/photolist-c2igoA-brF4Vz-uAxXD-brEVte-efbhex-uAxXH-99TMdZ-8iUPm7-cXN5kU-jVxS1R-wmLpBF-hKUZhk-7xtQbA-eADXSH-atMLeP-boA4g9-ecxiC9-nqc2Sm-dMg6mC-8MMJ8x-d5juPh-asBADA-r6TPQh-m1udmx-61Hy8w-cMtweh-cMtw4j-ecrCM8-eLUsLn-bx5oxw-jR1PuL-cXNxJE-89BAut-c4v7o1-f3J4X-aqSdzD-6BxAua-uAtCS-8iUNb7-9dNK9B-2xyXm5-62Ywoh-dWMo3c-66scSj-bxWoz4-2Cd8N-4Fauzf-bsX7hJ-gmB5Eh-dM15eF

The results of scientific studies are not always reliable because scientists after often under pressure and time constraints to deliver striking results. One example of a procedure that leads to unreliable results is p-hacking which is when a scientist collects a lot of different variables and then simply plays with the data until they find something statistically significant but also probably meaningless. Another contributing factor to unreliability is the fact that there is not much reward for replication studies. Aspirational studies dominate the field because doing things for the first time is more interesting, and this leads to lack of consistent proof. Finally, correlation does not always imply causation. Many studies link random variables that happen to be correlated and misreport their relationship as causal. This flawed approach has been taken to a greater degree in the media as random excerpts from studies have been reworded to make their results into more eye-catching material for an audience. Oliver says that the media wants “fun, poppy science we can share like gossip” because it evokes interest from the average viewer which producers can exploit.

I’ve always heard in the media and from friends about the latest health benefits linked to a daily glass of red wine, and I’ve always been skeptical about them. Oliver even used an example of one of these that compared the indulgence to an hour long trip to the gym. I had always just disregarded these claims because they seemed just a little too magical for my taste. Wine and exercise seemed completely unrelated. Something wasn’t quite adding up, although I never checked their findings online. As we are finding research, I think we should ensure that our sources are both well-cited and reputable. Simply being a “reputable” source isn’t enough with all the exploitation going on in the media, so following through on the citations seems especially key for research quality. Some of the more flavorful sources I encountered had embellished certain details, but it only took following their links to see where their claims were faulty.

--

--