TheLAriver t1_iy4z7lr wrote
Reply to comment by 1leggeddog in Eye-tracking study suggests that negative comments on social media are more attention-grabbing than positive comments by giuliomagnifico
We don't need data. We already have data. This was already common knowledge and not debated before this study existed. But it's also already been studied plenty.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1940161214524832
No one is gonna be challenged for sharing this opinion. It's so commonly held that some people have felt the need to try to push back against it with focuses on positive news.
I also don't see how this study would have any impact on policy. It's not a question that's relevant to legal policy. Unless you're hoping to live in some kind of fascist dystopia where your online activity is evaluated for negativity.
1leggeddog t1_iy56kej wrote
Data is not finite.
Data has a shelf life.
Just take the myriads of studies done on Alcohol. It was proven many times over to be bad for you. Ok.
Then it was proven to have beneficial effects for some with helping with coronary artery disease, lower bad cholesterol, etc etc.
Then the concentration of blood/alcohol ratio allowed before it becomes impaired driving was revisited several times over the years and refined according to better health understanding of the human body.
What i'm saying is that not only does the univserse change, so does our understanding of it. And that impacts past studies and past truths we held as facts, often to a greater amount of certainty.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments