Scientific studies are not always reliable because scientist are under pressure to produce new and interesting studies so they manipulate the data and procedures like using law sample sizes to get interesting results and few replication studies are done to conform the validity of most scientific studies now. In addition, they have big headlines or fictitious headings to grab the attention of new outlets and the general public. Lastly, there often seem to be contradictory studies about food and health in the media almost weekly for example coffee and its effects, sometimes it is good; however sometimes it’s bad. This leaves many with less trust for news/ scientific studies.
Scientific studies are reported on/in the media are skeptical because some studies are bias because scientist want eye catching positive results, example: eating 33 grams of chocolate is good for pregnant women. Scientists are under constant pressure to provide new, refreshing data so they shew and manipulate the procedures to get interesting results example is p hacking or data dredging which involves large volumes of data being analyzed to seeking any possible relationships between data to make premature conclusions. Media outlasts like to jazz up the stories and exaggerate the results or the effects to get viewers or listeners to buy certain things or do certain.
There have been many times when I have heard studies from new outlets or from a friend and I did not believe them because they sounded too ridiculous, for example hugging your dog is bad for your dog. I did not believe it because I have a dog and I know for a fact that hugging it makes both of us feel better and loved. I did not look it up later because it was too unrealistic to be true and I have a dog that serves as a living proof that my believe is true. To find reliable information using studies that have replications studies with the same or close result is advised.
Picture
Sources
http://www.eufic.org/article/en/expid/understanding-scientific-studies/
