tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5393996338560944889.post7753243921842409240..comments2024-03-02T02:26:00.928-05:00Comments on bleakonomy: Annals of questionable sciencetetracontadigonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04604381739383227553noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5393996338560944889.post-23874540798211437562009-09-28T13:51:24.613-04:002009-09-28T13:51:24.613-04:00Note: just because there are significant limitatio...Note: just because there are significant limitations in a study doesn't mean that one not ought to publish the results (just that one ought to be very clear about the limitations in the study itself).<br /><br />I don't know how much of this is bad study design, and how much of it is just crappy science reporting. Generally, when I investigate these sorts of things, I find the culprit is crappy science reporting, not crappy science. Nobody should be tootin' up a conference paper in the general media as being *anything* resembling a significant finding, unless it's a truly remarkable result. The only way to find out if it's a truly remarkable result is to sit in on the conference paper session and watch the audience dissect the results, and then follow the conference attendees around and see which results are the topics of conversation at the bar after the keynote dinner speech.padraighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06567721244433276365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5393996338560944889.post-41371257208745298592009-09-28T13:27:03.440-04:002009-09-28T13:27:03.440-04:00Failure to understand the difference between corre...Failure to understand the difference between correlation and causation is one of the hallmarks of Bad Science. It is such a useful marker that I would suggest NOT explaining it to the purveyors of Bad Science. The cat comes pre-belled, why tell it to take the bell off?Gadfly Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5393996338560944889.post-3204391932233236052009-09-28T08:06:27.771-04:002009-09-28T08:06:27.771-04:00Dear Lord. Can someone please sit these people dow...Dear Lord. Can someone please sit these people down and explain the difference between a cause and a correlation? Really. Not that hard.<br /><br />Charo, meant to reply to you on my post a million years ago and agree that I did not mean to imply there was a one-size-fits-all parenting.Elizabethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09953173396955681485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5393996338560944889.post-79612841692036973312009-09-25T20:00:57.077-04:002009-09-25T20:00:57.077-04:00It makes no sense to me, I would like to see the h...It makes no sense to me, I would like to see the hard science, that a hit to the butt causes neurons to die, or some biochemical reaction to take place. My take is that parents who are pre-disposed to hit (but for whatever reason didn't) with all of the environmental factors remaining the same, the IQ's would have the same effect. This seems like too much junk science, and the only way to even come close to proving it, have a set of identical twins with one being spanked and the other not, is far more horrendous to family dynamics then treating them equally.<br /><br />I have 3 boys. I very rarely spank them, but I have and the times I have it has been very effective, they simply have not repeated the offense that led to it, and even if the few cases I have if it leads to 3 point drop, well in some cases even that is worth it (I am thinking of the time one of my boys ran out in the street while I was screaming no) It wasn't punishment, it was reinforcement, and it worked.<br /><br />charoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com