To wonder why a person who claims they have done 'extensive research'...

[Newrunner29]

...belives they are as knowledgeable as someone who has dedicated their career and have the relevant professional qualifications in a subject? It really fustrates me and makes me concerned for future.
I see on the Internet all the time this 'extensive research' line and think, what makes u more knowledgeable and also the line could literally mean anything.

I found this twitter feed which is loosely linked, even when confronted this person continues to spead misinformation. i would love to know why?
I would say there is a level of arrogance to it to.

@Revertion

'Just accepting what they're told as fact' This is my point. Surely we need facts to be accepted!

I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here because I'm somewhere in the middle of your POV and the poster you quoted.

I feel like this (your post) is about science, and facts, in a scientific context, are always up for inquiry. That is one of the points of science. That's what physicists get excited about.

Absolute truths are different. They're not up for inquiry and because of that, they're not a part of science. There is philosophical arguments and quantum mechanics stuff surrounding this that makes my head feel like it wants to explode, but for the purposes of this post absolute truths exist.

We are all born.

Circles are not square.

I'm not sure accepting facts (in the scientific context - currently accepted realities) is something we surely need or should want.

There would be no progress? Or at least, progress would be based on chances of accidental discovery, and chances of the potential of the discovery being questioned.

The world is flat
The sun orbits earth
The universe expansion is slowing down

All examples of accepted reality - facts - which are now no longer.

There is the argument that if we focused more on teaching critical thinking, we wouldn't need to spend so long teaching facts.

I agree with u and thank u for pointing this out on the first part, i am wondering is the earth is round no longer a fact? Is it because their are people who belive it is flat? And where is the line, because anyone can belive anything doesnt mean it should be considered to question a 'fact' , of course people in same field should question science in a simple way of putting it, but why is anyone who has any apnion have right to question certain things.

Twitter is like a black hole.
My DW and I both have a scientific background. I have studied Anatomy and Physiology, she has a BSc in Biology and an MSc in Biotechnology.
I was thrown off Twitter last year after someone reported me for saying:

It is impossible for humans to change sex. No human in the history of the World has ever changed sex.
I then explained the SRY gene and the Y chromosome as simply as I could.

That resulted in the anime character simply replying - "reported" - and that was the end of me on Twitter.

I mean obviously everyone has an opnion on anything, rightly or wrongly whatever, i mean should it hold any weight

@OrganicBagel

But you don’t need qualifications to do your own research. What a cop out! I don’t need qualifications to research car safety. I don’t need to run my own crash test dummy trials or be a qualified engineer. I need to read the “research” that has already been done and THAT is my research. That’s what most research is! I work in a Uni research centre where academics do research which mainly involves reading results of trials and other people’s research papers and making their own conclusions, or analysing data from other people’s studies They don’t run the trials themselves but it doesn’t make them not researchers! I have a degree in statistics and policy analysis. I my doesn’t make me more or less of a researcher than someone who studied medicine or politics. Research isn’t a particular science! Anyone can do research. It is gathering data and information and making conclusions.

Yes but in many cases, surely you need the background, foundational knowledge of science to be able to fully understand what the paper is saying? I couldn't take say, a physics paper and read it all and fully understand it, there would be things I would be missing and misinterpreting because I don't have the foundation in physics to accurately interpret everything it's saying. There would be points that would go over my head that would impact on my understanding on subsequent parts of the research paper.

Extensive research usually means that they've read a few blogs by a nutritionist with a doctorate from some backwater university in the US.

Social media had the potential to be a force for good, but sadly the negatives are vastly outweighing the positives.

@Cuddlyrottweiler

I wish more people did their own research and made their own decisions rather than just accepting what they're told as fact. I don't like how easily people accept what they're told and obey people they've been told are above them. I think we train people from a young age to not challenge authority and it worries me.

Yes and no.

I think there are plenty of people who seem perfectly happy to challenge authority. And not always when it's a good thing. eg. an accident I saw recently where people were taking photos and ignoring the police who were telling them not to.

One research is debateable. Often ime "I did my own research" means they either googled for what they wanted ("proof that the world is flat"), read the evidence the way they wanted, don't know how to read the statistics correctly or don't know how to separate "John from Croydon" who tells them he's an expert on the subject or "Mr Jones with lots of letters after his name specialising in that specific subject for 30 year's".

After the last 18 months I think schools should put understanding statistics and being able to identify opinion from proper research.

Words like "specialist" get thrown around like confetti now. I've lost track of the number of "specialists" I've seen to do with my conditions. Pretty much everyone I've come across in hospital appointments, GP appointments say they're specialists. The actual number is two. One for each primary condition. Despite some being officially told to pack it in and had their career seriously dented (the "specialist neurologist" who turned out to be a GP with an interest in neurology and only GP level qualifications in neurology being very memorable) they still throw around the term specialist.

The woman who spits in my face is a "specialist mental health worker" - she's done a two day online course via groupon on mental health. That's it. The only thing she specialises in is manipulation.

True research means researching all possibilities not just the ones to confirm what you want to find. I had students doing research masters who didn't know that. I did a job where I was specifically told to "lose" data that didn't confirm what they needed confirmed.

That really annoys me - especially as I do research as part of my job, and I know that doing it seriously is hard work, and can involve the frustration of having to abandon a pet theory, in which one may have invested quite a lot, because THE EVIDENCE DOESN'T SUPPORT IT. And no, reading and quoting memes from the Internet is not the same thing.

Dunning-Kruger effect: people’s inability to recognise their own lack of ability.

Or “sometimes people are so dumb, they don’t realise other people might know more than them”.

Also, Trump’s “alternate facts”.

@Cuddlyrottweiler

I wish more people did their own research and made their own decisions rather than just accepting what they're told as fact. I don't like how easily people accept what they're told and obey people they've been told are above them. I think we train people from a young age to not challenge authority and it worries me.

Yes I do too. Sometimes it’s clear when someone is talking rubbish (as in this case) but often the expert opinion is reversed backwards and forwards and anyone who thinks we are being given the full story is being naive.

No wonder people are confused. Critical thinking is a skill that needs to to be be taught

@Newrunner29

Also i dont think we should blindly follow everything, i just think their needs to be a line, so for example it should be expected to follow a health care professional instead ofy neighbour who works a plumber ( insert job not relating to medicine) has done some 'research'

Absolutely, and the converse. If I have a problem with my boiler, I want the advice of a plumber not a doctor who -did extensive research- watched a Youtube video.

@Cuddlyrottweiler

I wish more people did their own research and made their own decisions rather than just accepting what they're told as fact. I don't like how easily people accept what they're told and obey people they've been told are above them. I think we train people from a young age to not challenge authority and it worries me.

Completely agree

@doodleygirl

It depends really, if I hadn’t done “extensive” research, I would still be sat here with the worst menopausal symptoms as he didn’t really believe in HRT! Fortunately my extensive research allowed me to confidently disagree with him.

Not all “experts” are expert in their whole field.

Correct, not all experts are experts in their whole field. But I'll bet your "extensive research" was by no means extensive research. You'll have done quiet a lot of reading and learning on the narrow subject of menopausal symptoms however someone who is an expert in this area would class your extensive research as a few hours worth of reading up, a tiny speck in the grand scheme of the extensive study and research that they have undertaken.

I mean this with no disrespect by the way, we should all be educating ourselves in our own healthcare needs, as you have done. I'm just putting some perspective out there.

too many to put here 😂😂😂

It’s so frustrating when people who have no idea what they’re talking about give other people advice!

The trouble is they shout so loud that people assume they know what they’re talking about and listen.
I get my info from the professionals not some random on SM.

Absolutely, and the converse. If I have a problem with my boiler, I want the advice of a plumber not a doctor who -did extensive research- watched a Youtube video.

I completely agree!

I’ll take my car to a garage and not a vet even though my vet is highly educated and extremely knowledgeable in their field but they can’t help me with my car as well as a mechanic can.

There is a lot in between blindly believing that the current consensus is the final one, and assuming that all experts on a subject are wrong; involved in a cover-up; paid 'shills'; etc.

I know all too well that sometimes experts can be wrong because there isn't yet enough knowledge. For example, when I was young, there was a consensus that children couldn't have Crohns, and therefore it wasn't tested for, and I wasn't diagnosed for over 10 years.

But there is a difference between saying, for example, 'The existing vaccines against Covid are probably not as effective as what may be developed in the future' and saying 'Vaccines are dangerous; we should rely on our immune systems (which in any case is what vaccines are all about FFS!); the so-called experts are being paid by the vaccine industry or they wouldn't recommend them; etc.'

Your average person has very little chance of being able to understand even first year undergraduate science. I think that people are scared of what they can’t understand and what they can’t control and this is a weird form of taking back control for them. I’m a microbiology lecturer and I have to laugh when some random person has told me to do my research as some Internet article/ social media post says A,B or C.

I’m not smart by any means - but I studied psychology at university and was bloody good at reviewing research and studies (it’s just the way my brain works - it’s all patterns in the stats and common sense and logic). I remember reading the Wakefield ‘evidence’ when it all kicked off (1986?) and telling my lecturer that it was just bonkers (or was I missing something???).

I am amazed at the gullibility of some people - and the brass neck of some when called out!

A lot of people aren't able to critically examine evidence. Unfortunately the internet has produced an environment where we are constantly exposed to misleading and inaccurate information. It also has given rise to some very deep echo chambers. Once someone gets an idea in their head, they will discover a wealth of information that appears to totally back up everything that they think they know. It can be difficult to come back from this.

how do we distinguish between the 2 ends of this, the google youtube videos/fb etc to the genuinely used critical thinking reading studies. We cannot.

With other people, this is true - especially online with strangers.

As individuals being strangers online, we can distinguish and try better to to discuss when we're read or watched something vs worked with data or researched, challenge media sources that misrepresent and oversimplify, support efforts to improve accountability in research & fields like medicine and to deal with issues like the replication crises. Shift cultural expectations of how we discuss what we know and limitations we all have.

The belief idea might be true, I've heard similar before about how social agreement can cement or chip away at worldviews, but as over half psychology and other social science research is never replicated and funding has led to some pisspoor methodology, we're not going to know until things change. The way things like that are often represented online often misses out the cracks in the Ivory Tower.

Extensive research = googled it.

Feckin eejits.

@OrganicBagel

But you don’t need qualifications to do your own research. What a cop out! I don’t need qualifications to research car safety. I don’t need to run my own crash test dummy trials or be a qualified engineer. I need to read the “research” that has already been done and THAT is my research. That’s what most research is! I work in a Uni research centre where academics do research which mainly involves reading results of trials and other people’s research papers and making their own conclusions, or analysing data from other people’s studies They don’t run the trials themselves but it doesn’t make them not researchers! I have a degree in statistics and policy analysis. I my doesn’t make me more or less of a researcher than someone who studied medicine or politics. Research isn’t a particular science! Anyone can do research. It is gathering data and information and making conclusions.

@OrganicBagel But they really can't, and I'm surprised you don't know that as a statistician. Research has to be systematic. Most people's 'own research' involves cherry picking things that they already agree with and not realising that the conclusions that they draw are likely to be influenced by confirmation bias

@Cuddlyrottweiler

I wish more people did their own research and made their own decisions rather than just accepting what they're told as fact. I don't like how easily people accept what they're told and obey people they've been told are above them. I think we train people from a young age to not challenge authority and it worries me.

What research do you think she did? Extensive testing? Reading peer reviewed scientific papers? Experiments? Or just read stuff on the internet that could have just been made up bollocks?

Just a year and a half ago 'experts' were telling us NOT to wear masks and it was ordinary people who were clambering for it. It's not as simple as experts always knowing best.

YANBU. Extensive research in these circumstances normally means they have watched YouTube videos or took a deep-dive into a Reddit thread.