Paper Suggests Letting The Government Use Your Router In An Emergency

How The Press Misinterprets Scientific Studies

from the dream-recording-machines dept

Mon, Aug 27th 2012 11:59pm — Mike Masnick

There's an absolutely awesome comic by Jorge Cham of PhDComics (which you should read whether or not you're a PhD student) about the science news cycle, in which a nuanced scientific result showing a slight correlation is turned into a causal relationship by the press, leading to a flat out frenzy of others in the press who don't even bother to understand what the original research was about.

Click image to see full version I'm reminded of this particular comic as the folks at On the Media point us to a story, told by Moran Cerf at The Moth (my favorite storytelling operation), about how, as a grad student, he got some research accepted for publication in Nature, the top of the top in terms of scientific journal prestige. His rather interesting research was about sticking electrodes in patients brains during brain surgery, having them think of certain things, and being able to have a projector project an image of what they were thinking. Cool, right? You can watch the video to see what happened once the press got hold of the story. In case you can't watch the video, the short version is that Cerf had put together a short video about the research, and at the very, very, very end, when talking to a colleague about how this kind of research might advance in the future, the research mentions something about studying and recording dreams. Now, nothing in the actual research is about studying or recording dreams, but... the BBC picked up on this part of the story, and then everyone picked up on this part of the story, and things only got worse from there. And no matter what Cerf did, everyone was just focused on these claims about dream recording -- even to the point that director Chris Nolan asked him to come on tour in a discussion about the movie Inception.

You can see the original Nature story here, followed by the BBC piece that focuses on dreams, even though that's not in the actual research. At least it admits that such things are far, far away. Others in the press weren't so careful. There are plenty of other such reports, but my favorite may be Metro in the UK that claims we're on the "brink" of recording people's dreams, despite that not being even close to true. For what it's worth, it appears some sources, such as Reuters did not parrot the dream recording angle, but plenty did.

It's a pretty good reminder that, especially when it comes to scientific research, you really shouldn't believe everything you read.

Oh, and as a random aside, while this story from Moran is entertaining, it does not come close in entertainment value to this other story that Cerf told at a different Moth event about his life as a bank robber. Seriously. No matter what you're doing today, find ten minutes to watch this next video:

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: brains, journalism, moran cerf, science, storytelling

16 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Yogi, 28 Aug 2012 @ 1:19am

MSM policy
"It's a pretty good reminder that, especially when it comes to scientific research, you really shouldn't believe everything you read."

This my policy when reading MSM (which is rare, but sometimes necessary. I assume that what I am reading or watching is:
1 - completely false, or else
2 - some kind of political propaganda (lies mixed with some facts)or,
3 - some kind of commercial/public relations effort (wishful thinking coupled with some lies)or;
4 - a fluff piece or a provocative piece intended solely for getting attention.

In any case I assume that the item:
5 - has not been fact-checked by anybody (since the media believes that there is no difference between truth and lies, what's the point of wasting time and money checking so-called "facts"?)

This policy has saved me a lot of time and energy, not to mention increased my mental health tenfold. I also save a lot of money by not buying newspapers.

This news-viewing policy is published under a CC license and may be used freely by the discerning public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2012 @ 4:25am
  
  Re: MSM policy
  MSM = Male Seeking Male?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2012 @ 7:44pm
    
    Re: Re: MSM policy
    Mainstream media, in case you're serious.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2012 @ 1:40am

Finally a solid explanation of why Techdirt's treatments of third hand stories always seem to come out positive for piracy and against copyright, patents, and trademarks.

Wowser.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chargone (profile), 28 Aug 2012 @ 2:48am
  
  Re:
  *blinks*
  ...
  ...
  ...
  conclusion is erroneous and obviously shill-like, but this one's actually Logical in how it gets there, and shows basic reading comprehension.
  
  do we have some sort of prize for that? 'cause we totally should.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2012 @ 4:31am
  
  Re:
  If you're going to complain about techdirt being baised then you should also be complaining that the MPAA/RIAA/BSA only ever publish statements in favor of stricter copyright and agiast piracy.
  
  I won't hold my breath
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- abc gum, 28 Aug 2012 @ 5:05am
  
  Re:
  1) critique the writings of others in blog
  2) get accused of being biased
  3) provide additional facts in support of conclusions
  4) get accused of being a shill
  5) ?????
  6) profit !!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2012 @ 5:47am
    
    Re: Re:
    5) the anti-techdirt trolls keep fucking that chicken
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 2 Sep 2012 @ 7:39pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So that's how they breed.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2012 @ 5:59am

It's not press, it's entertainment
The press doesn't misinterpret scientific studies. The press, whether it's traditional print, television, or online, is in the business of making money. That's their only bottom line. Stories are spun in a way to maximize readers/viewers. It's entertainment, not news. And just like traditional entertainment, they're going to appeal to the lowest common denominator to attract the biggest audience.

If you want unvarnished science news, then you need to go to publications such as Nature, which as a rule, require a higher intelligence level to grasp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2012 @ 6:13am
  
  Re: It's not press, it's entertainment
  It's not news it's fark.
  
  Or foobies(not safe for wok)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2012 @ 7:10am
  
  Re: It's not press, it's entertainment
  How would you know?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 2 Sep 2012 @ 8:28pm
    
    Re: Re: It's not press, it's entertainment
    how would you?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 28 Aug 2012 @ 10:08am
  
  Re: It's not press, it's entertainment
  True, the vast majority of "news" is actually entertainment and not to be taken seriously. However, that doesn't mean that "the press doesn't misinterpret scientific studies" at all.
  
  The press routinely misinterprets scientific studies, precisely to make them more entertaining.
  
  From my years working in a research lab, I can't overstate how hated journalism was amongst the scientists. Even the best-intentioned reporters got the stories wrong in ways that totally distorted the meaning of the research. As a result of that experience, I simply do not believe news reports of scientific studies. They are wrong.
  
  You can suss out the truth, though, form knowing that the majority of the time the stories are wrong in one (or both) of two ways: either by leaving out or underplaying important qualifiers such as "might," "suggests," etc., or by failing to put percentages into context. "x increases your chance of cancer by 300%!!" is scary, unless you know that your chance of the cancer actually raised from 0.000001% to 0.000003%
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pete Austin, 28 Aug 2012 @ 6:56am

Here's the latest example
Reported everywhere: "Teen Pot Users Risk Long-Term IQ Drop, Study Says"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/27/teen-pot-use-iq_n_1834392.html
http://content.usatoday .com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/08/study-pot-use-before-age-18-harms-iq-attention-memory/1
ht tp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19372456

Typical mistaken, correlation==causation reporting.

Kudos to the BBC for adding the following sentence at the bottom, "She also cautioned that there may be another explanation, such as depression, which could result in lower IQ and cannabis use", but I can't find any other site that has realized the issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dave Nelson, 28 Aug 2012 @ 11:43am

That's Show Biz, Folks!
Let's face it. AC was exactly correct. ALL "news" organizations are in the entertainment business, period. Their sole criterion is how many readers/viewers they can garner from a given story (and thus how many advertising dollars they can collect). Fact, "the truth", reality, have nothing to do with the issue. It's really too bad. Like the buffet restaurants in Las Vegas, all "news" organizations now have to be profit centers or they are disbanded. It's ruining both.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]