SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Millennials drive for 8% fewer trips than older generations:
we surveyed 2,225 American adults of all ages. On average millennials drive for 8% fewer of their typical weekly trips than baby boomers or Gen Xers.
Moreover, this difference does not disappear when we control for demographic information, proving that millennial behavior is not just about being young, single and low-income. Instead, what distinguishes millennials are their attitudes.
Millennials are more pro-environment than previous generations and less likely to believe driving gives them independence. They also see driving as more dangerous and want a travel mode that offers side benefits such as exercise or the ability to read or use social media.
The generational difference has profound implications for auto manufacturers.
(Score: 5, Informative) by bradley13 on Saturday July 11 2020, @10:56AM (8 children)
What a bizarre article for phys.org. Anyway, if we ignore their "study" of 40 millenials, all of whom obviously live in cities where cars are optional, then we are left with their study of 2225 people "of all ages".
First, we can snicker a bit at the theoretical contribution of this study: "a new field phenomenon, correlated groups , uncoordinated actors behaving as collective agents due to shared experiences and characteristics". How can they seriously claim this is new? This is bog standard social science.
Anyway, I guess I was bored, because I logged into the library and downloaded the paper. The target millenials were selected throught two means: (1) "personal and academic networks", cynically meaning, talk to people you know (most of whom will be in academia, i.e., poor grad students). (2) Posters at an employment office, cynically meaning, people who are out of work and have no immediate job prospects.
tl;dr: The study deliberately selected unemployed people and students, and is then surprised that they own fewer cars and drive less. Color me surprised.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 11 2020, @12:03PM (7 children)
I've often wondered how much further and faster science could be advanced if all studies banned using undergrad and graduate students as study participants. They're not a random set, they're the definition of self-selection. They have high incentive to not be honest, but try to respond in whatever way they think their professors want them to respond. They're not even representative of whatever set of people being studied (unless you're explicitly studying undergrad and/or grad students).
It's just easier to use the indentured servants already inside the ivory tower, then to get out in that yucky messy real world.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 11 2020, @01:38PM (4 children)
Plus 85% of them are Chinese. They probably ride bicycles pfffft hahaha losers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 11 2020, @07:46PM (3 children)
Every time I ride my bicycle past you at the gas station, I thumb my nose at you. Keep an eye out while you piss away your money on dino juice, that might be me rolling by with a big grin on my face.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 12 2020, @01:31AM (2 children)
Every time I run you over I thumb my nose at you. Keep an eye out while you piss away your money on orthopedic surgeons and physical therapy, that might be me driving on by with a big grin on my face.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 12 2020, @04:08AM
Maybe you need orthopedic surgeons and physical therapy after getting a little exercise. Eat your veggies. Try vegetable juice with caffeine powder for your morning drink. Avoid over processed foods and soda pop, even diet sodas. Aspartame is just as bad as sugar water.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 12 2020, @04:17AM
http://yehudamoon.com/comic/2012-11-21 [yehudamoon.com]
(Score: 2, Disagree) by bradley13 on Saturday July 11 2020, @05:59PM (1 child)
I will go cynically farther: how fast would science advance, if we took all the pretend scientists out of it. Social "sciences" are not science. Their studies are unsound, and if they were sound they would still not be reproducible.
Of course, even in the hard sciences, the bar needs to be raised. There are way too mant graduate programs churning out way too many unqualified graduates, because every school feels entitled to run a graduate school. 90% of the programs are crap, and their students shouldn't even pass undergrad courses.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 12 2020, @12:52PM
what's the alternative then? A lot of the social sciences cover things where we have a genuine need for knowledge, banning them would require that we come up with a better alternative which is likely not possible due to ethical and practical considerations. I do think that we need to raise our standards in terms of what acceptable results are, but expecting that these fields are going to be able to get the reliability that you see in the hard sciences anytime soon is unreasonable.
Or do you think that psychological, sociological and educational research, amongst others, are inherently without value?