Online comments hurt science understanding, study finds

[HuckleB]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/health/online-comments-hurt-science-understanding-study-finds-ib88cor-185610641.html

"University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers.

The new study reports that not only are just 12% of Americans turning to newspaper and magazine websites for science news, but when they do they may be influenced as much by the comments at the end of the story as they are by the report itself.

In an experiment mentioned in the Science paper and soon to be published elsewhere in greater detail, about 2,000 people were asked to read a balanced news report about nanotechnology followed by a group of invented comments. All saw the same report but some read a group of comments that were uncivil, including name-calling. Others saw more civil comments.

"Disturbingly, readers' interpretations of potential risks associated with the technology described in the news article differed significantly depending only on the tone of the manipulated reader comments posted with the story," wrote authors Dominique Brossard and Dietram A. Scheufele.

..."


Alas, this is not surprising.

(Yeah, I know it's a bit dated, but it's still valid information.)

[Binkie The Clown]

1. The implication is that our thoughts and impressions of the issues

are also manipulated by the posts we read here on DU.

[HuckleB]

3. That certainly seems plausible if the the findings are correct.

This is probably something that should be replicated, of course.

[tymorial]

2. This is why anti-Gmo and Anti-Vaxxer nonsense is pervasive.

EOM.

[mike_c]

4. ^^^yep^^^

eom

[LanternWaste]

5. Post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

Post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

QED