Guide to making claims based on research
Options
Replies
-
Maybe they shouldn't, but they will. It's going to happen. If you let that bother you, you will drive yourself bonkers.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims.
I enjoyed the post about baking soda being dangerous. Sadly, it devolved into "You're stupid and should prove it! / No I'm not! / Yes, you are! / Nuh-uh! / Yuh-huh!" and we all missed out on what could've been a very entertaining series of posts on the dangers of baking soda and, possibly, other baking products.
People are going to be wrong for the rest of your life. Might as well get used to it and not demand they submit research papers. At some point, you'll be wrong. Everyone is, sometimes. It's okay.
0 -
as someone who's offensive, I find that to be a challenge!
0 -
book marked0
-
I've done group projects on research papers before, or even in classes where we discuss the papers themselves, and it does really help to have that group discussion. People can help explain something to someone, or just discussing how you've interpreted it together can really help you better formulate a more accurate understanding and interpretation. I had one article for my animal cognition class that was a bit difficult to understand and it took my partner and me a good 6 hours to work on that presentation, most of which was spent just trying to understand the article! Usually that type of discussion leads to needing to re-read the articles anyways, which then leads to a better understanding.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims. It's fine to say like "yeah, I came across some articles summarizing research about x topic. They talked about x conclusions, I wasn't able to read/understand the original sources though so I can't tell you how valid the summary articles are!"
Then maybe someone else will see it and look through the primary source and might help explain it, or they might demonstrate how the blog post/newspaper/etc got it wrong, or whatever.
I've posted abstracts and article titles before when people would make claims without providing evidence, and I'd just post what I found with a quick search of my uni database, and if I ever read an abstract that I only partially understood then I'd say so. Or one time I posted about a really badly done research paper and I did say that I didn't really understand how the authors were computing their results in the table. So I was just like "if I'm interpreting this table correctly, then so and so results have been demonstrated." So just mmaking sure to even voice my own limitations as a reader is important.
That type of scenario would make for great threads imo - seeing a type of Q&A unfold is highly informative for me. There have been quite a few on FB recently about a few studies that, if you follow the threads, gives a better understanding of the studies.
Some people get very defensive about the fact that they don't have the education/understanding to be able to consider scientific research to back their claims, so instead of acknowledging it, they discount it as being irrelevant, or not credible. I've had several of these types of discussions on MFP. I've also seen people cite books full of cherry picked studies and subsequent requests to cite original research are refused because the book is considered the 'gospel'.
I'm not trying to be picky, I'm just thinking about the frustrating scenarios I come across here on MFP.
In other words, I think you're preaching to the converted. Actually, just the other day someone told me that they couldn't care less what the scientific community thought, and she continued on with her pseudoscience.
0 -
Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »
I've done group projects on research papers before, or even in classes where we discuss the papers themselves, and it does really help to have that group discussion. People can help explain something to someone, or just discussing how you've interpreted it together can really help you better formulate a more accurate understanding and interpretation. I had one article for my animal cognition class that was a bit difficult to understand and it took my partner and me a good 6 hours to work on that presentation, most of which was spent just trying to understand the article! Usually that type of discussion leads to needing to re-read the articles anyways, which then leads to a better understanding.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims. It's fine to say like "yeah, I came across some articles summarizing research about x topic. They talked about x conclusions, I wasn't able to read/understand the original sources though so I can't tell you how valid the summary articles are!"
Then maybe someone else will see it and look through the primary source and might help explain it, or they might demonstrate how the blog post/newspaper/etc got it wrong, or whatever.
I've posted abstracts and article titles before when people would make claims without providing evidence, and I'd just post what I found with a quick search of my uni database, and if I ever read an abstract that I only partially understood then I'd say so. Or one time I posted about a really badly done research paper and I did say that I didn't really understand how the authors were computing their results in the table. So I was just like "if I'm interpreting this table correctly, then so and so results have been demonstrated." So just mmaking sure to even voice my own limitations as a reader is important.
That type of scenario would make for great threads imo - seeing a type of Q&A unfold is highly informative for me. There have been quite a few on FB recently about a few studies that, if you follow the threads, gives a better understanding of the studies.
Some people get very defensive about the fact that they don't have the education/understanding to be able to consider scientific research to back their claims, so instead of acknowledging it, they discount it as being irrelevant, or not credible. I've had several of these types of discussions on MFP. I've also seen people cite books full of cherry picked studies and subsequent requests to cite original research are refused because the book is considered the 'gospel'.
I'm not trying to be picky, I'm just thinking about the frustrating scenarios I come across here on MFP.
In other words, I think you're preaching to the converted. Actually, just the other day someone told me that they couldn't care less what the scientific community thought, and she continued on with her pseudoscience.
hopefully people who have yet to be converted will see the light soon and practice better claim-making !0 -
^^ Guitar -- check out when the Science based medicine blog talks about her. some of the commentary there, which seems staged at times, was hilarious!0
-
Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »
I've done group projects on research papers before, or even in classes where we discuss the papers themselves, and it does really help to have that group discussion. People can help explain something to someone, or just discussing how you've interpreted it together can really help you better formulate a more accurate understanding and interpretation. I had one article for my animal cognition class that was a bit difficult to understand and it took my partner and me a good 6 hours to work on that presentation, most of which was spent just trying to understand the article! Usually that type of discussion leads to needing to re-read the articles anyways, which then leads to a better understanding.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims. It's fine to say like "yeah, I came across some articles summarizing research about x topic. They talked about x conclusions, I wasn't able to read/understand the original sources though so I can't tell you how valid the summary articles are!"
Then maybe someone else will see it and look through the primary source and might help explain it, or they might demonstrate how the blog post/newspaper/etc got it wrong, or whatever.
I've posted abstracts and article titles before when people would make claims without providing evidence, and I'd just post what I found with a quick search of my uni database, and if I ever read an abstract that I only partially understood then I'd say so. Or one time I posted about a really badly done research paper and I did say that I didn't really understand how the authors were computing their results in the table. So I was just like "if I'm interpreting this table correctly, then so and so results have been demonstrated." So just mmaking sure to even voice my own limitations as a reader is important.
That type of scenario would make for great threads imo - seeing a type of Q&A unfold is highly informative for me. There have been quite a few on FB recently about a few studies that, if you follow the threads, gives a better understanding of the studies.
Some people get very defensive about the fact that they don't have the education/understanding to be able to consider scientific research to back their claims, so instead of acknowledging it, they discount it as being irrelevant, or not credible. I've had several of these types of discussions on MFP. I've also seen people cite books full of cherry picked studies and subsequent requests to cite original research are refused because the book is considered the 'gospel'.
I'm not trying to be picky, I'm just thinking about the frustrating scenarios I come across here on MFP.
In other words, I think you're preaching to the converted. Actually, just the other day someone told me that they couldn't care less what the scientific community thought, and she continued on with her pseudoscience.
hopefully people who have yet to be converted will see the light soon and practice better claim-making !
Ahhhh, the optimism of youth, how refreshing...... :laugh:0 -
QueenBishOTUniverse wrote: »Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »
I've done group projects on research papers before, or even in classes where we discuss the papers themselves, and it does really help to have that group discussion. People can help explain something to someone, or just discussing how you've interpreted it together can really help you better formulate a more accurate understanding and interpretation. I had one article for my animal cognition class that was a bit difficult to understand and it took my partner and me a good 6 hours to work on that presentation, most of which was spent just trying to understand the article! Usually that type of discussion leads to needing to re-read the articles anyways, which then leads to a better understanding.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims. It's fine to say like "yeah, I came across some articles summarizing research about x topic. They talked about x conclusions, I wasn't able to read/understand the original sources though so I can't tell you how valid the summary articles are!"
Then maybe someone else will see it and look through the primary source and might help explain it, or they might demonstrate how the blog post/newspaper/etc got it wrong, or whatever.
I've posted abstracts and article titles before when people would make claims without providing evidence, and I'd just post what I found with a quick search of my uni database, and if I ever read an abstract that I only partially understood then I'd say so. Or one time I posted about a really badly done research paper and I did say that I didn't really understand how the authors were computing their results in the table. So I was just like "if I'm interpreting this table correctly, then so and so results have been demonstrated." So just mmaking sure to even voice my own limitations as a reader is important.
That type of scenario would make for great threads imo - seeing a type of Q&A unfold is highly informative for me. There have been quite a few on FB recently about a few studies that, if you follow the threads, gives a better understanding of the studies.
Some people get very defensive about the fact that they don't have the education/understanding to be able to consider scientific research to back their claims, so instead of acknowledging it, they discount it as being irrelevant, or not credible. I've had several of these types of discussions on MFP. I've also seen people cite books full of cherry picked studies and subsequent requests to cite original research are refused because the book is considered the 'gospel'.
I'm not trying to be picky, I'm just thinking about the frustrating scenarios I come across here on MFP.
In other words, I think you're preaching to the converted. Actually, just the other day someone told me that they couldn't care less what the scientific community thought, and she continued on with her pseudoscience.
hopefully people who have yet to be converted will see the light soon and practice better claim-making !
Ahhhh, the optimism of youth, how refreshing...... :laugh:
LOL
0 -
I just now saw the other thread and realized this one was created to take a jab at another poster.
Geez.0 -
where?0
-
Maybe they shouldn't, but they will. It's going to happen. If you let that bother you, you will drive yourself bonkers.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims.
I enjoyed the post about baking soda being dangerous. Sadly, it devolved into "You're stupid and should prove it! / No I'm not! / Yes, you are! / Nuh-uh! / Yuh-huh!" and we all missed out on what could've been a very entertaining series of posts on the dangers of baking soda and, possibly, other baking products.
People are going to be wrong for the rest of your life. Might as well get used to it and not demand they submit research papers. At some point, you'll be wrong. Everyone is, sometimes. It's okay.
Yes, but asking to support assertions and the OP not being able to, highlights the validity of the assertion.
Most posts are not for the benefit of the person in the thread - its for all the people who lurk and read.
0 -
I just now saw the other thread and realized this one was created to take a jab at another poster.
Geez.
Actually, it was inspired by that thread. I had wanted to post this topic a while ago originally, but then that was the day that the mods put the forums offline for updates. I wound up forgetting to post it and decided to do it today after the other thread.
0 -
QueenBishOTUniverse wrote: »Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »
I've done group projects on research papers before, or even in classes where we discuss the papers themselves, and it does really help to have that group discussion. People can help explain something to someone, or just discussing how you've interpreted it together can really help you better formulate a more accurate understanding and interpretation. I had one article for my animal cognition class that was a bit difficult to understand and it took my partner and me a good 6 hours to work on that presentation, most of which was spent just trying to understand the article! Usually that type of discussion leads to needing to re-read the articles anyways, which then leads to a better understanding.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims. It's fine to say like "yeah, I came across some articles summarizing research about x topic. They talked about x conclusions, I wasn't able to read/understand the original sources though so I can't tell you how valid the summary articles are!"
Then maybe someone else will see it and look through the primary source and might help explain it, or they might demonstrate how the blog post/newspaper/etc got it wrong, or whatever.
I've posted abstracts and article titles before when people would make claims without providing evidence, and I'd just post what I found with a quick search of my uni database, and if I ever read an abstract that I only partially understood then I'd say so. Or one time I posted about a really badly done research paper and I did say that I didn't really understand how the authors were computing their results in the table. So I was just like "if I'm interpreting this table correctly, then so and so results have been demonstrated." So just mmaking sure to even voice my own limitations as a reader is important.
That type of scenario would make for great threads imo - seeing a type of Q&A unfold is highly informative for me. There have been quite a few on FB recently about a few studies that, if you follow the threads, gives a better understanding of the studies.
Some people get very defensive about the fact that they don't have the education/understanding to be able to consider scientific research to back their claims, so instead of acknowledging it, they discount it as being irrelevant, or not credible. I've had several of these types of discussions on MFP. I've also seen people cite books full of cherry picked studies and subsequent requests to cite original research are refused because the book is considered the 'gospel'.
I'm not trying to be picky, I'm just thinking about the frustrating scenarios I come across here on MFP.
In other words, I think you're preaching to the converted. Actually, just the other day someone told me that they couldn't care less what the scientific community thought, and she continued on with her pseudoscience.
hopefully people who have yet to be converted will see the light soon and practice better claim-making !
Ahhhh, the optimism of youth, how refreshing...... :laugh:
LOL
You guys are meanies
0 -
Yeah, I got that.
There will be some who think, "Ooooh, how cool and smart! She really got that other poster!" and be impressed.
I'm not one of them and hope that poster didn't take anything I said as if I was referencing her (him?) in any way because that was not the case.
I have no need or desire to participate in the attempt to shame, humiliate or make fun of that person...and, in fact, would much rather be wrong than be a party to that.0 -
Dave198lbs wrote: »for the person brand new to taking some control of their health and deciding to finally lose weight, whether from a doctor's advice or peer pressure or just some sort of self awakening, the power of positive thinking cannot be emphasized enough. If a person believes and is committed to not eating after 7 pm, or cutting back on sugar, or having 6 small meals a day, I would encourage them to go on believing it until they eventually learn on their own that those things really don't matter.
This is pretty patronizing. I think people benefit from understanding what they are doing and why it works. Thinking that they must tie themselves in knots to get food every 2 hours (if they are not someone who enjoys eating that way) and can't then have the larger meals they find satisfying is something that could doom a person's success. Similarly, feeling like they must not eat certain foods together or have spoiled everything if they eat a cookie or after 7 pm end up being excuses to give up.
Far better to learn what the truth is.
Part of that truth might be investigating certain strategies that have worked for people (like some get less hungry so don't overeat if they eat frequently) and try those strategies to see if they work for you. That doesn't require thinking you must eat in some weird and regimented way (6 meals between 7 am and 7 pm, biggest one breakfast, X cups of water, no carbs with fat or whatever it is, etc.) if you happen to have gotten fat and want not to be. Or, worse, follow some dumb meal plan created by someone else and freak that if you eat chicken on fish day or brussels sprouts instead of broccoli it might not work.
For me, when I actually bothered investigating how losing weight worked is when I felt empowered to be able to do it and stick with it, and so often these silly myths are repeated by people who are obviously struggling.
None of this has to do with the thread this comes out of, for the record. I don't think noting that there is research on a topic or that scholars have argued something means that you are vouching for the correctness of that or are trying to prove the assertion (as opposed to the fact that it's not crazy to think it). Therefore, it's not your burden to research the various studies and form an opinion on them. It's instead the answer to the question "why would someone try X."0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Dave198lbs wrote: »for the person brand new to taking some control of their health and deciding to finally lose weight, whether from a doctor's advice or peer pressure or just some sort of self awakening, the power of positive thinking cannot be emphasized enough. If a person believes and is committed to not eating after 7 pm, or cutting back on sugar, or having 6 small meals a day, I would encourage them to go on believing it until they eventually learn on their own that those things really don't matter.
This is pretty patronizing. I think people benefit from understanding what they are doing and why it works. Thinking that they must tie themselves in knots to get food every 2 hours (if they are not someone who enjoys eating that way) and can't then have the larger meals they find satisfying is something that could doom a person's success. Similarly, feeling like they must not eat certain foods together or have spoiled everything if they eat a cookie or after 7 pm end up being excuses to give up.
Far better to learn what the truth is.
For me, when I actually bothered investigating how losing weight worked is when I felt empowered to be able to do it and stick with it, and so often these silly myths are repeated by people who are obviously struggling.
None of this has to do with the thread this comes out of, for the record. I don't think noting that there is research on a topic or that scholars have argued something means that you are vouching for the correctness of that or are trying to prove the assertion (as opposed to the fact that it's not crazy to think it). Therefore, it's not your burden to research the various studies and form an opinion on them. It's instead the answer to the question "why would someone try X."
you seem to find fault with many of my posts. I did not mean it to be patronizing.0 -
I don't think I find particular fault with your posts. We just disagree on this issue, which has come up a few places maybe.0
-
I just now saw the other thread and realized this one was created to take a jab at another poster.
Geez.
poster in said thread claimed that people that IF have lower instances of cancer…when asked to provide evidence of said claim that poster could not, or would not ..
I think that when people are saying that die x will prevent cancer that they should be required to back it up with fact ….
0 -
You have WAY too much time on your hands.-2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 392 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions