[recycled post - first appeared here]
Sometimes it can be difficult, when reading an article about a recent study and not the study itself, to determine whether the writing of the news release / the reporting or the science itself was a piece of junk.
The recent ScienceDaily article, Overbearing Parents Foster Obsessive Children, New Study Finds, reflects both. And this is unfortunate, for I have found other sites, such as PsychCentral and Medical News Today, that (mis?)inform their readers a new truth has been discovered.
Check out the description of the actual research methods:
Mageau focused on 588 musicians and athletes between the ages of six and 38 who practice their hobby at different levels (beginner, intermediate and expert). Mageau used a Likert-type scale to measure how parents support the autonomy of their child.
She also evaluated the psychological well being of the child regarding their hobby, which in this case was piano, saxophone, skiing or swimming.
Likert-scale . . . evaluated the psychological well being regarding a hobby . . .
Talk about fuzzy variables and indirect measures. Any conclusions should be stated in an overtly tentative fashion. Parenting may . . . study suggests . . .
The researcher provides this explanation (interpretation of her results, or was it her pet hunch heading into the study?):
Youngsters with a harmonious passion had parents or an entourage that supported them, while those with an obsessive passion were raised in an oppressive environment.
What the heck is a harmonious passion? One that sings in four parts? How can I get hold of a harmonious passion meter? Do I set the whole subject on it, or is it more of a probe, inserted directly into . . . ?
Okay, the social sciences are rife with complexity. That said, in any field taking an inch worth of data and running an mile with it should raise flags.
But who cares about data?
I do. As should any critical thinker.
In a better study (i.e., less junky) I encountered this headline: Maternal Depression And Controlling Behavior Associated With Increased Stress Response In Infants.
“Associated.” A much more reasonable (justified) announcement. And consider this ‘graph in contrast to the above:
A new study being published in Biological Psychiatry on September 15th suggests an association between a history of depression in the mothers, a particular style of mothering, “maternal overcontrol”, and increased stress reactivity of their infants.
“Suggests.” Again, more reasonable. The lead author is quoted as saying:
Practically, the open question is that of the long-term effects: are these infants at increased risk for psychological or physical stress-related illnesses later in life. If so, why?
Hear hear! The results of one study never provide us with a complete truth. Instead, they offer suggestions and invite further research.
Oh sure, it is exciting to jump to conclusions. But we do so at the risk of error. And, if we happen to be holding a megaphone, of misleading others.
Leave a Reply