If you listened to our last episode on the Dunning-Kruger Effect, you might have an idea why we wanted to follow up with spotting bad science. As we mentioned in Episode 5, the general trend in science seems to be the more you know, the more you are willing to acknowledge your uncertainty...so as science readers and writers, we should also be critical of scientific publications that make highly confident claims.
Luckily for us, Andy Brunning has created A Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science - a 12 point graphic poster to help you determine the quality of research and reports you might want to use in your own studies and writing. In this episode, we talk through these twelve points and try to give both everyday and academic examples of spotting bad sciences, to help you understand the causes and effects of misinformation.
It is worth mentioning that while science and other forms of reporting can be truthful, they may also be manipulative. We highly recommend looking reading the article title Controlling the narrative: Euphemistic language affects judgements of actions while avoiding perceptions of dishonesty. We could have dedicated a whole episode to euphemisms and jargon, and this article may be insightful for you.
The Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science: https://www.compoundchem.com/2014/04/02/a-rough-guide-to-spotting-bad-science/