One topic that has been at the back of my mind since we discussed it is the idea of data mining and how researchers follow the money. When a company supports research, the researchers are expected to have a specific outcome, or at least something really close to that. Millions of dollars are given to research, but of course companies want results that will help or support their company to be successful. The money that they gain is then given to research again to make their company even more successful (circulating reference? haha, just kidding, but really). This is something that I never really recognized before, and, for the most part, I believed the "facts" that I heard. Statistics were always something I was intrigued by, and I felt that they gave me a benchmark or a sort of relevance to my own life. It was something I could compare to to see how normal I was (whatever that's supposed to mean..). I feel like after this class, every statistic or fact that I see I question the validity of it. I now kind of look at statistics or facts as an average or ballpark range of how it actually is. The way I look at it now, if I see a fact, I see it is as a less extreme view than it usually is presented in. I have realized that a lot of facts are mean to scare or fear people, so they are presented in an extreme way and the facts are usually conditional or stretched a bit. To be honest though, when I see facts now, I still look at it and say to myself, "wow, that's interesting", but I usually translate it into my own perspective in a more realistic way. Unless I really care about the issue though, I'm not going to go out and research it further to see if the data is actually true. Hypocritical to write this blog on data mining then if I don't do anything about it? Meh, maybe, but at least I recognize it now, and to me, that's all that matters.
The class discussions we had on this issue made its way into every topic that we discussed (sex studies, agriculture, climate change) and I liked that. The fact that it came up so much made it important to me. This shows that data mining doesn't just happen in one field or by a specific group of people. It happens everywhere by everyone. Important? Definitely.
Questioning where information comes from is definitely a skill I believe that I improved upon from taking this class due to all our discussions about funding for studies and stuff like that. I agree with your post entirely about how money kind of is central to almost all the discussions we had because it really makes the world go round. It seems like it can either drive improvement or cause roadblocks in any forms of science and is key in making decisions about what KINDS of studies are completed and what are not.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both of you when talking about questioning the origins of information. No doubt that from now on I will look to validate information I hear based on its origins and who might be propagating and for what cause. Companies and their direct involvement with research on certain issues is a great example of why one should be inclined to question the validity of information given to the public. It makes all the sense in the world for a company to pay for research that, regardless of the outcome, would "validate" their claims. One connection that can be made here is that in culture we feel the need to validate things, and what science can offer is that validation. Yet when politics rub against this connection, we are often left with misleading information and profitable yet completely bogus claims. I can't dive too much into this thought, but one thing I have also taken from this class is that regardless of the science and regardless of the culture, there will always be money flowing to somewhere. I hate to be cliche but money does make the world go 'round, and it is no more evident than when discussing the politics of funding research.
ReplyDelete