Comparing 'The Good And Well, You Decide'
People often give for granted that whatever is told by individuals who have a title relevant to what is being affirmed is true. Failure to take into consideration where the source of information comes from and what information is given and not given, is a common habit. This leads to a distorted vision of reality and most of the times to an incorrect understanding of the world. When comparing the article from the magazine Miller-McCune “The Good, The Bad and… Well, You Decide” with the research report of the same study, this becomes evident. Both the article and the research paper delineate a correlational study that has been conducted by Neuroscience researchers. The study was based on the assumption that in men, there is a correlation between
…show more content…
their facial proportion and how aggressive they are. However, even though both inform about the same research, it is evident that the article from the magazine is not able to give the same detailed information given by the scientific report.
In this essay I will compare the research reported in the magazine article and in the scientific report in order to underline the differences.
As stated in the introduction, there are a great number of differences between the actual research and what is reported in the magazine. In order to understand where these differences mainly stand in, I will give a summary of the research report in order to compare it later on in the paper with the magazine article.
The research report “Facial Structure is a Reliable Cue of Aggressive Behavior” was written by Carrè, Mc Cormick and Mondloch, from the department of Psychology and Centre for Neuroscience in Brock University. The scientists affirmed through a scientific method that the facial width-to-height ratio is a valid metric to esteem behavioral aggression in men. The research report starts with an abstract where the hypothesis is given and e brief delineation of the two studies that were conducted, in order to prove the theory. Following the abstract the research report gives an introduction stating how people make judgments based on facial traits. The hypothesis was based
on the fact that these general assumptions were true most of the times, therefore the scientists decided to test the correlation between aggression and the WHR (width to height ratio). The researchers then explain why the theory was formed, and by giving a brief introduction of dimorphism (“the existence among animals of the same species of two distinct forms that differ in one or more characteristics, such as coloration, size or shape”(dimorphism)), they explain why this theory cannot be built also on women. Furthermore, they define aggression as the number of button presses on a third button in the first study and as the number of penalty minutes in a hockey game for the second study. After an accurate definition of aggression (relevant to the study) was given, the authors explain how the experiment was conducted by accurately explaining how the pictures were made. These photographs were obtained by a sample of 37 men ( their aggressive behavior and WHR was quantified previously) all volunteers. To yield the WHR the researchers took the distance between the left and right zygion which was divided by the distance between the upper lip and the mid brow. The participants were selected randomly all undergraduate students. These were 16 women and 15 men with a mean age of 19.94 years. The exposure to the pictures was random as well. Accurate details on how the width-to-height ratio was calculated is provided also aided by a visual evidence. Moreover, all the results are expressed with the calculations to the outcome and also these are aided by graphs of the statistics and the final ratio. Study one shows how the correlation coefficient for WHR and aggression is positive and is equal to .95. While study two demonstrates that the estimates of aggression were highly consistent as well and were of .89 (correlation coefficient varies from -1 to 1) Finally, the discussion in the end provides clear detail to all possible variables that are not accounted in the study and explains that the width to height ratio can be considered as a reliable cue of aggressive behavior but must not be considered a determinant.
The magazine on the other hand, is a brief summary of the research paper. It is obvious that a magazine article cannot carry all the information of the research paper. However the reader must take this into consideration before making any assumptions. Compared to the research report the writer briefly gives an outline of how the research was conducted and immediately jumps to the results. He tells that people were exposed to pictures of men and were asked to determine if these men were aggressive or not, according to their judgment. Richardson in the article talks about aggressiveness, however he never specifies how aggressiveness is measured. He also never mentions a comparison group. Many questions can be raised while reading the article: what is aggressiveness according to the study? Is there a comparison group? Was the correlational study conducted also on women? How many people were involved in the study? Are these a sample of the population of interest and what is the population of interest? How many pictures were they exposed to? How many times was the experiment done? How were all participants selected? Why where they selected? Was the selection done randomly? In the pictures did all men have the same neutral expression? None of the questions have an answer in the article. Due to the scarce information no one else could conduct the same experiment after reading this article. Furthermore, Richardson writes the results of the positive correlation quoting the scientists who conducted the study. He gives high importance to the positive correlation and fails to remind the audience that a correlational study does not infer a cause and effect relationship.
In conclusion, as stated before, it is extremely important for the reader to ask questions on whether the text is providing all details necessary to assess that truth is being reported. The research report written by the scientists was so full of details that whoever could have conducted the same exact study. On the other hand, from the magazine article too many aspects were left out and the scientific method of the experiment was barely touched. If women read only the article and took every single word for granted, they would probably stay away from men who have a “low-ratio face” (indication of aggressiveness as measured in the study). It is important to define every single aspect of the study and report all the measurements in order for the study to have both external and internal validity. Finally, it is also very important to understand that media reports are not always accurate.
Reference
dimorphism. (n.d.). In Dictionary Definitions. Retrieved November 25th, 2010, from http://www.yourdictionary.com/dimorphism
their facial proportion and how aggressive they are. However, even though both inform about the same research, it is evident that the article from the magazine is not able to give the same detailed information given by the scientific report.
In this essay I will compare the research reported in the magazine article and in the scientific report in order to underline the differences.
As stated in the introduction, there are a great number of differences between the actual research and what is reported in the magazine. In order to understand where these differences mainly stand in, I will give a summary of the research report in order to compare it later on in the paper with the magazine article.
The research report “Facial Structure is a Reliable Cue of Aggressive Behavior” was written by Carrè, Mc Cormick and Mondloch, from the department of Psychology and Centre for Neuroscience in Brock University. The scientists affirmed through a scientific method that the facial width-to-height ratio is a valid metric to esteem behavioral aggression in men. The research report starts with an abstract where the hypothesis is given and e brief delineation of the two studies that were conducted, in order to prove the theory. Following the abstract the research report gives an introduction stating how people make judgments based on facial traits. The hypothesis was based
on the fact that these general assumptions were true most of the times, therefore the scientists decided to test the correlation between aggression and the WHR (width to height ratio). The researchers then explain why the theory was formed, and by giving a brief introduction of dimorphism (“the existence among animals of the same species of two distinct forms that differ in one or more characteristics, such as coloration, size or shape”(dimorphism)), they explain why this theory cannot be built also on women. Furthermore, they define aggression as the number of button presses on a third button in the first study and as the number of penalty minutes in a hockey game for the second study. After an accurate definition of aggression (relevant to the study) was given, the authors explain how the experiment was conducted by accurately explaining how the pictures were made. These photographs were obtained by a sample of 37 men ( their aggressive behavior and WHR was quantified previously) all volunteers. To yield the WHR the researchers took the distance between the left and right zygion which was divided by the distance between the upper lip and the mid brow. The participants were selected randomly all undergraduate students. These were 16 women and 15 men with a mean age of 19.94 years. The exposure to the pictures was random as well. Accurate details on how the width-to-height ratio was calculated is provided also aided by a visual evidence. Moreover, all the results are expressed with the calculations to the outcome and also these are aided by graphs of the statistics and the final ratio. Study one shows how the correlation coefficient for WHR and aggression is positive and is equal to .95. While study two demonstrates that the estimates of aggression were highly consistent as well and were of .89 (correlation coefficient varies from -1 to 1) Finally, the discussion in the end provides clear detail to all possible variables that are not accounted in the study and explains that the width to height ratio can be considered as a reliable cue of aggressive behavior but must not be considered a determinant.
The magazine on the other hand, is a brief summary of the research paper. It is obvious that a magazine article cannot carry all the information of the research paper. However the reader must take this into consideration before making any assumptions. Compared to the research report the writer briefly gives an outline of how the research was conducted and immediately jumps to the results. He tells that people were exposed to pictures of men and were asked to determine if these men were aggressive or not, according to their judgment. Richardson in the article talks about aggressiveness, however he never specifies how aggressiveness is measured. He also never mentions a comparison group. Many questions can be raised while reading the article: what is aggressiveness according to the study? Is there a comparison group? Was the correlational study conducted also on women? How many people were involved in the study? Are these a sample of the population of interest and what is the population of interest? How many pictures were they exposed to? How many times was the experiment done? How were all participants selected? Why where they selected? Was the selection done randomly? In the pictures did all men have the same neutral expression? None of the questions have an answer in the article. Due to the scarce information no one else could conduct the same experiment after reading this article. Furthermore, Richardson writes the results of the positive correlation quoting the scientists who conducted the study. He gives high importance to the positive correlation and fails to remind the audience that a correlational study does not infer a cause and effect relationship.
In conclusion, as stated before, it is extremely important for the reader to ask questions on whether the text is providing all details necessary to assess that truth is being reported. The research report written by the scientists was so full of details that whoever could have conducted the same exact study. On the other hand, from the magazine article too many aspects were left out and the scientific method of the experiment was barely touched. If women read only the article and took every single word for granted, they would probably stay away from men who have a “low-ratio face” (indication of aggressiveness as measured in the study). It is important to define every single aspect of the study and report all the measurements in order for the study to have both external and internal validity. Finally, it is also very important to understand that media reports are not always accurate.
Reference
dimorphism. (n.d.). In Dictionary Definitions. Retrieved November 25th, 2010, from http://www.yourdictionary.com/dimorphism