While the Science Scholars strive for accuracy in their research, we Arts Scholars one-up them by discussing why that accuracy is worth striving for; in arts-speak, we examine the ethical implications of certain discursive structures surrounding the production and distribution of research.
Tracey McIntosh on the dangers of selectively (mis/ab)using statistics prompted me to think about the disparity between public and academic interpretations of research. As seasoned second-year students, we might forget that the average person retrieves their information not from peer-reviewed journal articles, but from Twitter*, the telly, and memes.
Chris Morris’ seminal mockumentary series Brass Eye cleverly satirises the ways in which information is (mis)represented by the media. In the first episode, Animals, the Man vs Animal evil continuum paradox yields a pattern so unreadable that “you may as well draw in a chain of fox heads”; doing so results in the world “cruel” flashing. While clearly designed to elicit laughter, it is not until the cartoonish impaled fox heads appear on screen that the viewer realises they’ve been fed sophistries.
Because humans are non-statistical by nature, information that has been sullied and exaggerated to entertain and confirm our biases is easily digested. Thus, we might be tempted to create research that common people** want to read, and that, by extension, someone is likely to publish. Pressured by publication bias, significosis, and disjunctivitis, our knowledge systems begin to resemble RIRO gyres of falsified science*** and meaningless research. This is inherently dangerous to the quest for knowledge that we Arts Scholars treasure so dearly, because as researchers we rely endlessly upon a community of others (including, and I say this through gritted teeth, scientists) to inform and improve our own work.
*Though it might be true that even academic research is subconsciously affected by the researcher’s personal experiences (as discussed by Dr Patrick Thomsen), such as reading a tweet.
**I may or may not be listening to Pulp while writing this.
***See linked information about Elsevier’s false scientific journals.
The Man vs Animal evil continuum paradox. Credit: Brass Eye
See also:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2017/02/02/lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-how-bad-statistics-are-feeding-fake-news/#7c13ff9a50ca
https://www.the-scientist.com/the-nutshell/merck-published-fake-journal-44190
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_in,_garbage_out
https://serval.unil.ch/resource/serval:BIB_8EF01CB80A64.P001/REF.pdf
