SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The University of Colorado Boulder has an article up about a paper [open, DOI: 10.1038/s41562-018-0520-3] [DX] published Monday in Nature Human Behavior which finds that U.S. adults:
who hold the most extreme views opposing genetically modified (GM) foods think they know most about GM food science, but actually know the least
The paper's key finding is that:
the more strongly people report being opposed to GM foods, the more knowledgeable they think they are on the topic, but the lower they score on an actual knowledge test.
Interestingly the authors found similar results applied to gene therapy, but were unable prove a similar conclusion when they tested against climate change denialism. This leads them to hypothesize that:
the climate change debate has become so politically polarized that people's attitudes depend more on which group they affiliate with than how much they know about the issue.
It might be instructive to run similar studies in a number of areas such as
Vaccinations
Nuclear Power
Homeopathy
...
Where would you like to see this study done next?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bussdriver on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:05PM (2 children)
Waste of time; probably just to bolster support with the corporate sources of their institutions funding... (if not already getting promoted, big PR firms know the playbook... one doesn't have to pay off people to get useful results.)
We already have plenty on tribalism and identity psychology showing the facts do no good when emotions are running high. Better to put time into how to address human nature. Do we need to go around picking subgroups identifying them with the label so we can smear the larger groups? No. We need to know how to prevent and cure human flaws. Alienating groups does not fix the problem. There is a time and place for shaming but it's not that often.
I know Genetic Engineers and I remember the old script kiddies who didn't know jack about computers; the two are way too similar and over confident if not arrogant in their understanding of the systems they hack around with. Script kiddies just infected themselves, did little harm, maybe jailed... but Genetic Engineers can do so much more harm without repercussions it SHOULD legitimately scare people...(even when it works out perfectly, serious issues still emerge.) That is, if you can even get "consensus" on the damage they cause because PR firms have proven obvious problems like global warming can be held up decades getting overwhelming consensus even then it is still held up. It is so bad we have to change the label because "Global Warming" has become Pavlovian.
(Score: 5, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 15 2019, @08:41PM
And, before that, we need to know how to correctly define: what is a flaw vs. what is an evolutionary feature which improved our survival in the past and will improve our survival again in the future.
The present modern world is insane and unsustainable. Just because a particular behavior might be logically, rationally flawed in today's world doesn't mean much at all when looking at the longer picture of, say, mammalian existence on Earth.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:57PM
just look at cancer rates and try to prove various industry is responsible. it will be the same with these arrogant fucks. no accountability.