I have a critique report to do and I'm not so sure about how to approach it, but I have finished my assignment and will any of you can help me proofread it? Thanks!
The article "Who Got the Germiest Hands?" is reported on the ABC news on November 3, 2008 by Randolph E. Schmid, claims that this study has found that females have greater numbers of bacteria on their hands than males do, bacteria varies between hands on the same person, and washing do not eliminate bacteria on your hands. This research is conducted on 51 college students with their hands tested on a "highly detailed system for detecting bacteria DNA". Researchers have suggested that reasons why females have more bacteria on their hands than males do because males on average have more acidic hands, women have more contact with cosmetics and moisturizers, and differences in oil production between men and women. This study seems to have findings which generate positive aspects, but the overall study has many negative aspects as well.
These research findings that are reported are interesting to the media. For example, many people might not have realized that women generally have more bacteria on their hands than men do because people usually think that men are not as sanitary as women are. Moreover, researchers in this study have come up with different scientific suggestions for their results. These suggestions may generate more hypotheses which may lead to more research findings.
Although the study appears to have many attractive findings, the study itself is not as scientific as it looks. This study is conducted on 51 participants, but this lacks random sampling, because the media article does not mention how they find these participants to participate the research. Furthermore, without random sampling; the data will turn out to be junk data. Also, without random sampling in their research, the 3d variable problems come up in the study. For example, these participants may have touched some school properties and facilities that are used by the public which these factors may cause the participants to contact more bacteria on their hands. With the problems of random sampling and 3d variables, the data will not be as accurate as it has reported on the news.
In addition, the research is very vague because the researchers do not reveal what their procedure was, what experimental methods that they have used during their study and how they have come to their conclusion for their experimental research. From their vague report, the researchers have not manipulated any variables that they have, which lacks internal validity. The imprecise research that the media has reported appears that their findings are not scientifically valid.
Also, the suggestions that the researchers have provided in the report are actually 3d variables which affect the outcome of the experiment. Even though they are suggestions, researchers can eliminate these 3d variables by random sampling and manipulating their variables. From the media article, researchers are using their suggestions as the cause of their result, which is inferring causation from correlation.
With the combination of inferring causation from correlation, lacks of random assignment and internal validity and 3d variable problems have made the whole research scientifically invalid. These problems have affected truth of the research findings that are reported. If scientists want to have an effective experimental research, it is best to state their procedures and control for their 3d variables.
The article "Who Got the Germiest Hands?" is reported on the ABC news on November 3, 2008 by Randolph E. Schmid, claims that this study has found that females have greater numbers of bacteria on their hands than males do, bacteria varies between hands on the same person, and washing do not eliminate bacteria on your hands. This research is conducted on 51 college students with their hands tested on a "highly detailed system for detecting bacteria DNA". Researchers have suggested that reasons why females have more bacteria on their hands than males do because males on average have more acidic hands, women have more contact with cosmetics and moisturizers, and differences in oil production between men and women. This study seems to have findings which generate positive aspects, but the overall study has many negative aspects as well.
These research findings that are reported are interesting to the media. For example, many people might not have realized that women generally have more bacteria on their hands than men do because people usually think that men are not as sanitary as women are. Moreover, researchers in this study have come up with different scientific suggestions for their results. These suggestions may generate more hypotheses which may lead to more research findings.
Although the study appears to have many attractive findings, the study itself is not as scientific as it looks. This study is conducted on 51 participants, but this lacks random sampling, because the media article does not mention how they find these participants to participate the research. Furthermore, without random sampling; the data will turn out to be junk data. Also, without random sampling in their research, the 3d variable problems come up in the study. For example, these participants may have touched some school properties and facilities that are used by the public which these factors may cause the participants to contact more bacteria on their hands. With the problems of random sampling and 3d variables, the data will not be as accurate as it has reported on the news.
In addition, the research is very vague because the researchers do not reveal what their procedure was, what experimental methods that they have used during their study and how they have come to their conclusion for their experimental research. From their vague report, the researchers have not manipulated any variables that they have, which lacks internal validity. The imprecise research that the media has reported appears that their findings are not scientifically valid.
Also, the suggestions that the researchers have provided in the report are actually 3d variables which affect the outcome of the experiment. Even though they are suggestions, researchers can eliminate these 3d variables by random sampling and manipulating their variables. From the media article, researchers are using their suggestions as the cause of their result, which is inferring causation from correlation.
With the combination of inferring causation from correlation, lacks of random assignment and internal validity and 3d variable problems have made the whole research scientifically invalid. These problems have affected truth of the research findings that are reported. If scientists want to have an effective experimental research, it is best to state their procedures and control for their 3d variables.
