Dispassionate Science
Taleb argues that scientists can be drawn to sensational findings. Combining evidence across studies can help place a striking result in context, although a review’s reliability depends on its methods and included evidence.
THE IDEA
Dispassionate Science
Taleb presents this critique of attention in science:
Now, if you think that science is an abstract subject free of sensationalism and distortions, I have some sobering news. Empirical researchers have found evidence that scientists too are vulnerable to narratives, emphasizing titles and “sexy” attention-grabbing punch lines over more substantive matters. They too are human and get their attention from sensational matters. The way to remedy this is through meta-analyses of scientific studies, in which an überresearcher peruses the entire literature, which includes the less-advertised articles, and produces a synthesis.
When to use it
Evaluating health claims in the media: instead of relying on a single study, look for meta-analyses or systematic reviews.
In academic research, when writing literature reviews, aim to include meta-analyses to avoid bias from standout studies.
In policy-making, base decisions on comprehensive reviews of evidence rather than individual studies.
In education, teach students to critically evaluate research by considering the full body of evidence and recognizing the role of meta-analyses.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Coffee and cancer headlines
Suppose a study with a dramatic title receives attention while a less striking study is overlooked. A systematic review and, where appropriate, a meta-analysis could compare the evidence. The quality of the synthesis still depends on which studies it finds and how it evaluates them.
Power posing effect
The claim 'power posing boosts confidence' needs to be assessed against the relevant studies and reviews. Distinguish the specific outcome being claimed from other proposed effects; the excerpt does not supply a review establishing their size.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Think of a scientific finding you recently encountered. Was it presented with a sensational headline? How might a meta-analysis change your understanding?
When reading scientific news, do you tend to focus on studies with dramatic results? How can you ensure you are getting a balanced view?
How can scientists themselves guard against the allure of sensationalism in their own work?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- The Black Swan The Impact of the Highly Improbable With a new section On Robustness and Fragility (Nassim Nicholas Taleb)