Read on Twitter
"I did my own research"
A Thread
In one my classes, a student said they liked to do their own research on scientific questions like masking, instead of just accepting consensus. So I asked what that meant.
A Thread
In one my classes, a student said they liked to do their own research on scientific questions like masking, instead of just accepting consensus. So I asked what that meant.
"Did you set up a study to see what kinds of mask fabrics best prevent the spread of aerosolized virus particles?"
Of course not. Doing one's own research doesn't actually mean doing scientific research. It means reading scientific studies, which is what my student did.
Of course not. Doing one's own research doesn't actually mean doing scientific research. It means reading scientific studies, which is what my student did.
"Did you go over the statistical methods section? Sometimes there are big errors in there that are tough even for other scientists to spot, especially in complicated models."
Of course not. Most of the time, lay researchers aren't equipped to do that kind of work.
Of course not. Most of the time, lay researchers aren't equipped to do that kind of work.
"So what did you do?"
My student read through the abstracts and conclusions of some articles on PubMed.
"For how long?"
A few hours. Who—other than experts—can read studies as a full time job?
My student read through the abstracts and conclusions of some articles on PubMed.
"For how long?"
A few hours. Who—other than experts—can read studies as a full time job?
But it turns out there's actually people who, in addition doing studies themselves, also study other studies, ALL DAY LONG, and have the expertise to understand those studies, or access to experts who do.
The people producing scientific consensus statements we "blindly" follow.
The people producing scientific consensus statements we "blindly" follow.
So here is the million dollar Q: What benefit is there—outside of an intellectual exercise—to "doing the research yourself"?
Odds are high that MY research will be wrong, or biased, or incomplete, compared to the consensus.
Why would *I* be more likely to get it right?
Odds are high that MY research will be wrong, or biased, or incomplete, compared to the consensus.
Why would *I* be more likely to get it right?
Transparency and empowerment are wonderful things. But we need to think long and hard about the truisms that we've internalized about what makes for good science, and for a public that's well-informed about science.
Perhaps "doing your own research" isn't so good after all. /x
Perhaps "doing your own research" isn't so good after all. /x
