I need us all to start looking at bylines more.
The man who wrote this doesn’t have a degree in *anything* — and it shows in the writing.
A tangent in the thread, hopefully short.
The man who wrote this doesn’t have a degree in *anything* — and it shows in the writing.
A tangent in the thread, hopefully short.
Reposted from
Louisa
I found this an interesting but maddening read. Interesting for the research, but maddening for how it was written, focusing almost exclusively on children, using “he” as the pronoun for every hypothetical child, and spending a lot of time on how ADHD symptoms annoy parents and teachers
Comments
Lazy arguments become easy to spot.
I laughed out loud at the line about not being able to find a single gene for ADHD. What else is diagnosed without a single gene? (A lot)
People overlook meta-analyses, but they also overly elevate the importance of single publications.
NYT guy takes the study and uses it way beyond its relevance.
In scientific articles, authors spell out what their question is, why they’re looking at the question, what they’re doing, what they found, conclusions…