Internet Source Distortion/Misrepresentation
From media,or the Internet, identify an example of each of the following sources of distortion (faulty causal and/or statistical inference)
a. A study with questionable sponsorship or motives
b. Reliance on insufficient evidence/hasty generalization
c. Unbalanced or biased presentation
d. Unexamined assumptions
e. Faulty causal reasoning
I have to find a source that has all these questions covered.
As I understand your question, you can use several different sources.
Any study conducted by a political party is suspect.
so i can write about any experiment gone wrong that doesnt have legit reasoning?
It doesn't have to be an experiment.
a. A study with questionable sponsorship or motives
Look for a study (or studies) that says something is good for your health, but the study was conducted by a company that makes or markets that product -- for example, anything sponsored by Bristol-Myers Squibb or any other pharmaceutical company).
b. Reliance on insufficient evidence/hasty generalization
See "e" below!
c. Unbalanced or biased presentation
Just about any TV station or network! As Ms. Sue has said, "Any study conducted by a political party is suspect."
d. Unexamined assumptions
This seems obvious, yes?
e. Faulty causal reasoning
Any study that states unequivocally that X is the cause of Y without proven evidence and well researched reasoning.
To find a source that covers all the aspects of distortion mentioned (faulty causal and/or statistical inference), you can follow these steps:
1. Begin by searching for news articles, opinion pieces, or research studies on a topic of your interest. You can use search engines like Google, academic databases, or news aggregator websites.
2. Read a few articles that seem relevant to your topic. Look for signs of distortion or misrepresentation based on the five criteria provided.
Now let's examine each criterion and how you can identify them:
a. A study with questionable sponsorship or motives:
Look for information about the researchers or organizations behind the study. If they have an affiliation or involvement that could bias the results or promote a certain agenda, it is a potential sign of distortion.
b. Reliance on insufficient evidence/hasty generalization:
Check whether the source provides a sufficient amount of evidence to support the claims or conclusions being made. Look for any instances where the author jumps to conclusions based on limited evidence, generalizes from a small sample size, or fails to consider alternative explanations.
c. Unbalanced or biased presentation:
Pay attention to whether the source presents information from multiple perspectives or only focuses on one particular viewpoint. Look for any language or tone that displays bias or uses loaded terminology to sway the audience's opinion.
d. Unexamined assumptions:
Assess whether the source makes explicit or implicit assumptions that are not adequately supported or critically examined. Look for any statements that are taken for granted without sufficient evidence or that rely on logical fallacies.
e. Faulty causal reasoning:
Analyze if the source establishes a plausible causal link between two variables without proper evidence or logical reasoning. Look for instances where correlation is mistaken for causation, where alternative explanations or confounding factors are not considered, or where the causal connection is merely speculative.
By critically evaluating various sources, you should be able to find one that covers examples of all these distortions. Remember to consider multiple sources to get a balanced understanding, and always fact-check and verify claims whenever possible.