genderStuff_150620.txt

Hi Phil. Thanks for the response. It's great to hear that you're in contact with the study authors. I think open science is the best science. Can you forward their data so I can make a more measured judgement? You know, the data you've obviously reviewed to conclude that no single woman in the study had to work as hard as was claimed? Maybe you can point me to the passage in the article where they break down the actual dataframe. I didn't notice it.

A bit more seriously, you are--without any sarcasm--absolutely right. We shouldn't take study results on faith so readily, especially if they might feel so right due to confirmation bias. I do, actually, believe open science is the best science. This particular study webpage is actually hosted by one Dr. A.C. Higgins as part of a "science fraud" project. So it's probably a good thing that I've emailed Agnes Wold, one of the co-authors of the study, to ask if the data are actually available and if she'd be willing to share. Let's see how things actually shake out.

On the other hand, this strident dismissive tone does you no favors. It may very well be that your experience in those analytical fields gave you a notion of poorly conducted science. You state in the third sentence of your response to Robin to say if she's not willing to change the article based only on the fact that you say it's incorrect, that it's clear evidence she's only operating toward her agenda (which we presume is a social-justice-warrior/extreme feminist agenda aiming to label as pathological everyone with testicles). This lack of common courtesy and arrogance suggests you have your own agenda. In short, it makes you sound petty.

Let's see if we can get more information and perhaps we can come to our own independent conclusions. Science is not the providence of the intelligentsia, especially scientific claims of institutionalized unethical or immoral behavior. We need go no further than spring '15 to see the very public results of data falsification and the corresponding false conclusions. Moreover, we can read the works of Ioannidis to see how common purposeful or accidental fake science has been.

But maybe let's approach it a bit more mindfully. Instead of condescending to Robin about helping her with math, or suggesting she's propping up an agenda at odds with reality, I say let's engage the topic as if we're all after the same thing: a better world. True science isn't afraid of scrutiny, but scrutiny needn't be couched in harshness and incivility.

I'll let you know if I get any data and we can continue.