FAKE & SPURIOUS NEWS: THE COLLEGE TEXTBOOK

Abstract

Fake news is a serious issue and prevails in both the print and electronic media. With this issue in mind of the student population and others, authors may inadvertently include false materials in textbooks. These books can be wrong and there must be an ongoing review of each edition of source textbooks.  This applies to all media including academic journals.  Below is a discussion of some examples and suggestions to move toward validity. Fake is used here as totally false. Spurious for this article is information that has some substance that may be correct. Non-metric means qualitative analysis and metric is usually applied to numbers that generate significance or correlation.

Introduction

Snopes is a fact checking organization. They entitle “The Fake News Invasion” an incredible increase in false stories. They say:

The sharp increase in popularity of social media networks (primarily Facebook) has created a predatory secondary market among online publishers seeking to profitably exploit the large reach of those networks and their huge customer bases by spreading fake news and outlandish rumors. Competition for social media’s large supply of willing eyeballs is fierce, and a number of frequent offenders regularly fabricate salacious and attention-grabbing tales simply to drive traffic (and revenue) to their sites.
Facebook has worked at limiting the reach of hoax-purveying sites in their customers’ news feeds, inhibiting (but not eradicating) the spread of fake news stories. Hoaxes and fake news are often little more than annoyances to unsuspecting readers; but sometimes circulating stories negatively affect businesses or localities by spreading false, disruptive claims that are widely believed.
So long as social media allows for the rapid spread of information, manipulative entities will seek to cash in on the rapid spread of misinformation. Perhaps the most egregious of the many nonsense peddlers on social media are fake news sites, so here we offer a guide to several of the most frequent (and unapologetic) hoax purveyors cluttering up newsfeeds. (Snopes.com, 2017)

The  issue is not specific names of news frauds, rather the amount of the fake news and how it can get into the classroom through the textbook. The most premiere example is the concept of “bystander effect.” Although, the definition of the effect has stood the ravages of time, it’s origin came from a phony account of a young lady of which many bystanders looked the other way when she was killed.

Description

In 1964, a young lady was raped and stabbed to death in Queens (New York City) 38 people saw it from their windows and did nothing. Two weeks later the New York Times published an article criticizing the bystanders for not caring or doing anything. The whole issue created a new term (bystander effect) where others believe that someone else will take care of the matter. By 2016, the brother of the victim had returned to the scene many times and finally was able to substantiate that many called the police and that one lady cradled Kitty Genovese while she was dying. The New York Times published an apology. The “bystander effect” may have spent many years in sociological, psychological, and social psychology textbooks (psychologytoday.com 2018) the concept appears to be not spurious, but the original example was not valid.

John Powers of National Public Radio (2016) reviewed the story and essentially the crux of the legend was wrong that neighbors did care and called the police and that the police were slow to act and the New York Times was fooled. The story went around the world. Unfortunately, the news was spurious, but the concept has held up in other instances. There are other sources that support John Powers and National Public Radio on the internet.

Not only has this had an impact on qualitative or descriptive information that does not use numbers, but it also accounts for statistical articles. In this instance, the information is gathered and tested by certain statistical strategies.

We now enter an area where numbers are applied to reality or perceived reality. This is extremely problematic because falsehoods can be lost in numbers. Certain statistical strategies are favored over others because it increases the likelihood of getting published and perhaps tenure. (Snell, 2014)

“Big Data Days” occurred in the early 70’s. At this time, the works of perhaps hundreds of statistical problems were conducted by many clerks. With the use of computers and new software, very complex relationships could be calculated by one person in a very short time. Social sciences rushed to the new setting because of the efficiency and the prestige of computer made the various fields more “scientific.”  Unfortunately, this author recalls my professor fighting a smirk. He said that we were to assume or believe that numbers on all kinds of variables were “hard numbers.” (Ibid. 2014)

Hard number theory assumes that each variable has a “0” baseline, can be added, subtracted, divided, and multiplied. There is equidistance between numbers and various other attributes. Unfortunately, when one statistically analyzes phenomena that don’t have hard numbers, the probability of error increases, but so do the possibility of the prestige of the findings increases. (Barrett, 2004)

One talent in this field Ioannidis (see below) suggests that findings in the area of social neuroscience are roughly 40 to 50 percent false positives. In other words, it is other than valid. Additionally there is fraud and poor research. To save time and space, Ioannidis (2005) and Mundy (2005) suggest that much of the literature is flawed based on the assumption of how it is interpreted and funded. Further those articles based their findings on hard number theory or meta-analysis and are generally false Snell, J., and Marsh, M. (2009) there are number of others. This includes total frauds, the quality of the research is poor and it is apparent. The research is manipulated. It is testimonial data. Some may be spurious (as used in the article) and can become part of another study. Money is used to promote the article.  Suggestions to reduce the false research will be indicated at the end of this article.

Zetterberg (1965) reviews two strategies toward validity. The first is the discovery level. One finds good information that is helpful, but not conclusive. This includes: reviews, purposive samples, theoretical articles, short term hypotheses, case studies, participant observation, and sample limitations. The best level is the verification level. This includes random samples (4% statistical variation 600 respondents) (3% = 1500) (1%=5500) this assumes a 5% level of confidence.

Further, political pressure is avoided and findings may be vetted by peers. Lastly replication is very helpful, and triangulation is used.”File drawer” studies that do not show a significant difference should be included.

The greatest phony finding was done by Dr. Alan Wakefield who falsified a study that indicated that vaccines cause autism. Although retracted it still prevails in common knowledge relative to parents with babies at this writing. That means that they come to believe that the vaccines will hurt their children. Wakefield’s study was replicated over and over and his findings were found to be false. (CNN staff, 2011)

 Thus, one is left with replication and fact checking.  It has to happen. It is part of academic’s constant conflict Validity is at times a struggle, thus the following are helpful: OpenSecrets.org/ TruthandFiction.com/ Hoax-Slayer.com/FactCheck.com/ Snopes.com/PoliticalFact.com. Please also see Wikipedia.com.

CONCLUSION

This article reviews problems and research of the social sciences or the social neurosciences.  Both descriptive and number oriented examples were described and how shoddy research can be contained. The golden strategy is a review of the literature using small and purposive samples in various studies. Then a random sample is drawn that generally has 1500 respondents. Smaller samples may be used due to certain limitations. Most studies should use nominal or ordinal statistical treatments. False positives should be reduced and the prestige of the field should be enhanced. Comparing the golden strategy with meta-analysis there is a 35% difference (Ioannidis, 1998) Meta-analysis should die a very slow death, but may be replaced with another more promising strategy. Textbooks and the information contained within them should be improved.

REFERENCE CITED

Barrett, A. (2004) Why Medicine and Money Don’t Mix: Do drug makers have too much control over lab-data? Business Week, June 28, 68-70.

CNN   Wire Staff (2011) Retracted Autism is an Elaborate Fraud, British Journal Findings, CNN.COM/2011/ Health/01/05 autism, vaccines, index /html

Ioannidis, J. (1998) Meta-Analysis and large randomized controlled trials, New England Journal of Medicine, 8/337, 536

Ioannidis, J. (2005) Why most published Findings are false PLos Med. Vol.168

La Capria, K. (2017)Snope’s Field Guide to Fake News Sites and Hoax Purveyors Snopes.com’s  guide to the  internet’s click baiting, news faking, social media exploiting, dark side.

Mundy, A. (2001) Dispensing with the Truth, New York: St. Martin’s Press

Powers, John (2016) “The Witnesses Exposes Misconceptions of Kitty Genoese’s Murder) National Public Radio (6/16/1:34)

Snell, J. & M. Marsh (2003) Meta-Cognitive Analysis. An Alternative to literature reviews and meta-analysis science and the arts, Education, winter, 364-367.

Snell, J & M. Marsh (2009) Deconstructing Meta-Analysis, Psychology and Education: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 46, #1, 36-39.

Snell, Joel C. (2014) Deconstructing Statistical Analysis, Education, spring, Vol. 134, /3/282-284.

Staff, psychologytoday.com/basics/bystander effect/

Zetterberg, H. (1965) On Theory and Verification in Sociology, Totowa, N. J. Bedminster Press.