GodBlessThisGhetto t1_j22dyvr wrote
Reply to comment by _--00--_ in Anti-transgender legislation associated with suicide-related Internet searches when the state had a high LGBT population density. by Respawan
This is what gets me about these “citizen scientist” types. Don’t you think the scientists carefully crafting a rigorous analysis that needs to pass extensive peer review know enough to make sure that “Suicide Squad” isn’t captured by what they’re searching for?
How do you think that the experts are dumb enough to miss an exceedingly obvious confound instead of correcting for it or at least being aware of it? It’s like the anti-climate change people looking at a paper and going “did they account for volcanic activity” as if that’s some huge missing link that was likely overlooked.
_--00--_ t1_j23qqso wrote
Did you read about the study?
I'm not a scientist. I'm no expert. I also don't know if this was peer reviewed. I didn't read it was. But from what I read, yes they used the word suicide and depression for these numbers. And used them against searches for weather per region. So no, they did not account for search context.
This research seems lazy. I already know more gays and trans are suicidal under laws that are against them. But this study was fuckign stupid and poorly done.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments