Did you know grilled cheese sandwich lovers have more sex? Time magazinereportedon a study that says so. Don't take it too seriously though — it came from a dating site that surveyed 4,600 of its users, just in time for National Grilled Cheese Day.
换句话说，这完全是不科学的。时间覆盖了舌头。但情况并非总是如此。有时legitimate studymight get covered in an illegitimate (but entertaining) way.
Advertisement
马丁·吉巴拉博士是加拿大安大略省麦克马斯特大学运动机能学系主任。他的研究sprint interval trainingwas repeatedly characterized in headlines as being a "one-minute workout，“即使引用的60次秒爆发只是a portion of a 10-minute regimen。他说：“有些媒体做得非常出色，他们提供了一个平衡的作品，这几乎是正确的。”“其他媒体登上了标题，有时您会处理甚至还没有阅读研究的媒体。”
But he's sympathetic to the plight of journalists. "On the one hand, the media often wants to work in sound bites, or they want a message boiled down quite simply, and that's often a challenge because scientists are often by nature cautious and that frustrates the media because scientists are unwilling to go outside the bounds of their specific study," he says. "Ideally, they're able to meet in the middle and both be happy."
Slight misrepresentation wasn't exactly irksome for him, however. "In some respects, it's the price to pay a little bit because obviously as a scientist you want to make an impact, have people talk about your research," he explains, noting that a short piece could lead to an in-depth 45-minute podcast.
有时，误导性信息不是记者的错。“有时这项研究不是真的很好，”这本书的经济学家约翰·H·约翰逊博士说EVERYDATA: The Misinformation Hidden in the Little Data You Consume Every Day。“除非您是该领域的专家，否则记者很难知道。”
One instance of this would be the nowcompletely discredited vaccines-cause-autism study,which has done untold damage to the immunization movement.
One of Johnson's favorite examples of wildly exaggerated "science" is theMozart Effect study, which says that playing classical music to babies can make them smarter.
"The study was actually done on three to four dozen college kids," he says. Somehow, this was parlayed into music improving the cognitive skills of infants and very young children. This is one case where Johnson believes it could have helped reporters, had they delved deeper. "Looking a little closer at what the study means and really thinking hard before extending it to the broader population." In fairness, the author of the papernever intended她的研究适用于婴儿。
Media are in constant competition for clicks, which can lead to sensational headlines. John Oliver, host of "Last Week Tonight" recently opinedon the topic，指的是对科学的轰动性报道，无非是“早晨表演八卦”。
约翰逊解释说：“记者想讲述人们感兴趣的故事，但现实是你必须处理细节。”“大多数研究，您通常都会取得少量的增量进度。这是一种难得的情况，当'哇，今天我们发现这种革命性的事情将改变我们的一生。讲一个关于烤奶酪改善您的性生活的故事要有趣得多。”
Improving Science Coverage
So, how can media coverage of science be improved? Research scientistLuz Claudio,Ph.D., author ofHow To Write And Publish A Scientific Paper: The Step-By-Step Guide, advises researchers to write their own press releases with the help of their institution's press office to get the message out. "Also, they should answer reporters' inquiries in writing rather than giving telephone interviews in order to reduce the potential for misinterpretation of results," she says in an e-mail interview.
And what can readers, and journalists themselves, do? They can see who funded the study — would it be surprising that a coffee company funded a study that said coffee was good for you? They can look at how many people were studied; if it's just 20 women, can the finding apply to all women?. And, most of all, they can understand the difference betweencausation and correlation。
For example, there was a study that saidusing an iPhone makes you smarter。If that were really true, that would be causation (just by using an iPhone you would suddenly be able to win on "Jeopardy.") "But when you look at the study," says Johnson, "what it actually says is that people who live in states with the highest percentage of users also have the highest percentage of bachelor degrees. One has nothing to do with the other!" That, my friend, is correlation, but not causation.
Advertisement
