Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyone who has worked with the scientific method knows that data can be manipulated to prove whatever the person with the hypothesis wants to prove within reason. You can also exclude data from your random sample until you collect enough random sample data that sways your hypothesis into the direction you want the conclusion of your thesis to go.
Interestingly enough, this whole study is based pretty much entirely on opinions.
The only facts are whether the participants belong to a political party, and whether the participants have any interest in the news - provided that all participant's answers are truthful answers, which might as well be an opinion because another group reproducing the same study could draw participation that answers completely the opposite of the participants in this published report.
Whether they consider themselves to be politically aware, or digitally aware, or have faith in the quality of news they receive are all just their own personal opinions.
The conclusion of this particular PEW Research presents an opinion about opinions based primarily on the opinions of its participants. How factual is that??
I agree, it is very easy to make research turn out how you want it. That's why having blind faith in anything that calls itself science is a big mistake.
And it is not usually easy to divide everything into either fact or opinion. Especially anything that's controversial. And the social sciences are more vulnerable to bias. I have seen lots of research that is contrived to prove a certain point. And really smart people often don't see it, because they are conditioned to have faith in scientific research.
The study looks very well done to me. They specifically chose statements from a variety of what would be called conservative and liberal perspectives, asked participants questions to determine their political leanings, how politically aware they were, digitally savvy, even whether they trusted news organizations.
For each question they were asked to judge they had to say not only if they thought it was fact or opinion but whether they actually agreed with it and whether they thought it was accurate. And they said younger people were better at determining fact vs. opinion REGARDLESS "of the ideological appeal of the statements" - so not just the liberal statements YOU think they SHOULD agree with.
I think you've got a lot of biases about this topic. ...this study was very thorough - it was done by Pew. Why are you attributing negative motives to them that they are trying to "inspire age discrimination"? That in itself is a very broad statement that goes far beyond this survey.
If I didn't know better I'd say this was a tr0lling attempt.
I agree, it is very easy to make research turn out how you want it. That's why having blind faith in anything that calls itself science is a big mistake.
And it is not usually easy to divide everything into either fact or opinion. Especially anything that's controversial. And the social sciences are more vulnerable to bias. I have seen lots of research that is contrived to prove a certain point. And really smart people often don't see it, because they are conditioned to have faith in scientific research.
Why do you assume everyone (but you) apparently has "blind faith"? This is a common theme of yours.
I read a study and the first thing I do is go to the primary source to determine how sound their methodology is and I don't trust popular media to necessarily understand or present the research. You don't think others take that time? I have faith in research that is done using rigorous scientific methods.
The study looks very well done to me. They specifically chose statements from a variety of what would be called conservative and liberal perspectives, asked participants questions to determine their political leanings, how politically aware they were, digitally savvy, even whether they trusted news organizations.
For each question they were asked to judge they had to say not only if they thought it was fact or opinion but whether they actually agreed with it and whether they thought it was accurate. And they said younger people were better at determining fact vs. opinion REGARDLESS "of the ideological appeal of the statements" - so not just the liberal statements YOU think they SHOULD agree with.
I think you've got a lot of biases about this topic. ...this study was very thorough - it was done by Pew. Why are you attributing negative motives to them that they are trying to "inspire age discrimination"? That in itself is a very broad statement that goes far beyond this survey.
If I didn't know better I'd say this was a tr0lling attempt.
How can you not recognize the fact that its all based on opinions?
If I collect random sample data from primarily young people in Belleview, WA which is a relatively youthful community, would it make sense that the opinions expressed (i.e. answers given) would lean towards the opinions of youth?
Likewise, if I collect data from primarily elderly people in Boca Raton, FL, which is a relatively elderly community, would it make sense that the opinions expressed (i.e. answers given) would lean towards the opinions of elders?
If I collect random sample data from San Francisco, CA and Greenwich Village, NYC regarding homosexuality, would it make sense that the slant would be pro-gay?
Would you expect the same random sample gleaned from Salt Lake City, Utah and Hershey, PA to be similarly pro-gay?
Let's say the folks answering their phones in SLC, Utah and Hershey, PA are coming back more pro-gay than I would like them to be, can I not keep calling until I can bring the opinions to a majority of anti-gay if that is what serves the purpose of my thesis? YES, I certainly can. Doesn't matter if I convince PEW Research to publish it or not.
It is sad to see the fact PEW Research published it viewed as some 'good science seal of approval'.
No ONE entity should ever be handed that much power so easily as to not give what has been presented a second thought.
It is also sad to see you insinuate that such questioning could be a tr0ll. Questioning is and always will be the engine that keeps good science separated from the bad.
How can you not recognize the fact that its all based on opinions?
If I collect random sample data from primarily young people in Belleview, WA which is a relatively youthful community, would it make sense that the opinions expressed (i.e. answers given) would lean towards the opinions of youth?
Likewise, if I collect data from primarily elderly people in Boca Raton, FL, which is a relatively elderly community, would it make sense that the opinions expressed (i.e. answers given) would lean towards the opinions of elders?
If I collect random sample data from San Francisco, CA and Greenwich Village, NYC regarding homosexuality, would it make sense that the slant would be pro-gay?
Would you expect the same random sample gleaned from Salt Lake City, Utah and Hershey, PA to be similarly pro-gay?
Let's say the folks answering their phones in SLC, Utah and Hershey, PA are coming back more pro-gay that I would like them to be, can I not keep calling until I can bring the opinions to a majority of anti-gay if that is what serves the purpose of my thesis? YES, I certainly can. Doesn't matter if I convince PEW Research to publish it or not.
It is sad to see the fact PEW Research published it viewed as some 'good science seal of approval'.
No ONE entity should ever be handed that much power so easily as to not give what has been presented a second thought.
It is also sad to see you insinuate that such questioning could be a tr0ll. Questioning is and always will be the engine that keeps good science separated from the bad.
Why do you keep talking about different parts of the country? Of course opinions could vary across the country - not based on geography per se but on concentrations of people with particular political leanings which was taken into account as I stated earlier. Read the methodology: The analysis in this report is based on a nationally representative survey conducted from Feb. 22 to March 4, 2018, among a sample of 5,035 adults 18 years of age or older.
The research not BASED on opinions, rather it is ABOUT opinions. And I didn't hand Pew unilateral kudos - but I read their methodology FIRST and yeah, they have a good rep beyond THIS survey.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
