Scientific Literacy is required for citizenship. We cannot
understand the proposals to fix our problems if we can’t tell what is true and
what isn’t.
Science is a methodology. It’s about trying to figure out
what is objectively true. To do that scientists use various methods to try and
test for what really is happening and account for bias and other things that
might be impacting whatever it is they are looking at. Some scientists do this better than others.
This is why scientists submit their work to peer review and
everyone else in their field critiques their work looking for problems. It
seems adversarial, but, we all have biases and we all miss things and having
other people double checking our work for mistakes helps catch mistakes. This
is a good thing and something we all should welcome.
When something is reported in the news, journalists and
others report what the study says. But what happens if the journalist isn’t
scientifically literate? Or the editor has biases and wants a big splashy
headline? When that happens, the
headlines may not be supported by the paper or the findings.
Because our lives literally depend on science it’s important
that we become scientifically literate, meaning we must all learn how to read
reports and papers and make judgements about whether what they are claiming is
likely. We need to learn to be skeptical. In other words, we need to learn to
think like a scientist, and look for reasons why the study doesn’t say what it purports
to say.
I am linking to an article about how to read and understand
a scientific paper for non-scientists. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/05/09/how-to-read-and-understand-a-scientific-paper-a-guide-for-non-scientists/
First things first. Get the actual paper. If you are reading
an article about a study – link through to the study. Eventually you will get
to a pdf put out by the scientist or their university. It will look something like this: https://cyber.harvard.edu/publications/2017/08/mediacloud
On this page – you should be able to download the entire
paper or read the summary and introduction, methods used and key takeaways. If
the key takeaways are different from reported, congratulations, you’ve passed
step one.
Next, look for caveats to the findings. Scientists will
always tell you what the limits of their findings are and how they aren’t valid
in all sorts of situations they didn’t control for. Knowing what this paper
doesn’t say – is useful and will help prevent you from believing the hype about
whatever the paper is about.
Now, read the article. Yes, they are long. Yes, they use all
sorts of terms that may seem complicated. But, you won’t be able to tell
whether you agree with their conclusions if you don’t. And, they are often very
fascinating because of things that are down deep in the data. For instance, the
paper I linked to makes claims at the top that seem a bit outrageous, but as
you read through and realize how they got there- it makes sense.
If you aren’t sure whether a method used by the researchers
is problematic – go and look for critiques. Not political critiques, scientific
critiques. Politicians try to debunk science they don’t like all the time. They
may be correct, but they may not be. Often, they are just spouting propaganda
-and cherry picking the evidence. You want to know what is true and whether you
can trust the politician so find out what other actual scientists say and
remain skeptical.
Good luck – our society depends on all of us getting this right.
No comments:
Post a Comment