Evaluating Peyton Manning,Einstein, and Beer

Yesterday’s blog was comprised of two contrasting articles related to drinking alcohol and working out.  The first article was found in the Washington Post and the writer identified the negative effects of alcohol on exercising athletes.  The second article was about the virtues of drinking beer while exercising. Which article was more accurate?

 In evaluating the credibility of an article, consider the following: 1. The credentials and/or expertise of the writer. 2.  Where the article appeared, the source, the date – a newspaper, a magazine, a scientific journal, etc. 3.  The basis for the information, the statistics, the findings etc.  – was it opinion, was it a research study, was it a survey etc. 4. The funding for the article- a paid commercial, a drug company, a government agency, etc.  5. The bias of the writer- where was the money coming from to pay salary and/ or the agenda?

In other words, there are a number of variables to consider when evaluating the material.  If the article was  found in a scientific journal, more than likely the research paradigm met scientific criteria, i.e. hypotheses, null hypotheses, experimental design, levels of significance, etc. if the data did not come from a scientific or professional  journal, then we must question the results, findings or opinions.

When findings are presented or summarized, let’s hope that the writer was accurate. If you ever listened to talk radio or watched television news, you might question what was being said since the speaker did not seem to worry about accuracy. In any event, good luck in evaluating, what you read and what you hear.

In the March 10-11, 2012 edition to the Wall Street Journal, a computational analysis of the conversation and social networks was computed using 33,000 posts. The following was reported on the online buzz about Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning.  To give a few samples: 21%   were classified as Anger.  ”The Colts deserve another season like their last .”   34%   were classified as Love for Peyton. ” Peyton is one classy dude.”  The article did identify the online sources.

 Some of my criticisms of this article include: 1. 33,000 posts were not random, nor were they universal, which translated –the sample was biased.  With a biased sample, generalizations cannot be made with any degree of accuracy.  2.  The classification such as “love” and the example presented was questionable.  To call Peyton, one classy dude, and put that in the love category was arbitrary and subjective.  If someone called you classy, that does not mean they love you?  A classy dude can be associated with “thinking highly of you, admiring you, respecting you.”   Further, what can you conclude or learn from the people in that survey?  Aside  that online  people have  different opinions (anger, love, speculation, jokes) about Peyton leaving the Colts, not much  more as far as I am concerned.
From Secretariat: If someone called me a classy Dude I would hit him. Now Stud Muffin I could live with.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."– Albert Einstein