The IRMA Community
Newsletters
Research IRM
Click a keyword to search titles using our InfoSci-OnDemand powered search:
|
Telling the Quants from the Quacks: Evaluating Statistical Arguments in Debates Online
Abstract
Determining the credibility of statistical research has traditionally been done through peer-reviewed journal publications. With the recent increase in research shared in online forums comes emerging challenges for authors sharing results and for readers determining if research is valid. This chapter introduces a heuristic for evaluating the credibility of statistics based on methods used to counteract claims made in The Bell Curve. The approaches gleaned from this case are then updated for online environments and demonstrated using contemporary online debates about climate change science and skepticism. The heuristic for evaluating credibility of statistical arguments online is useful for readers and as a guide for authors adapting their research for online publication and debate.
Related Content
|
Michelle Willis.
© 2019.
21 pages.
|
|
Kamna Sahni, Kenneth Appiah.
© 2019.
21 pages.
|
|
Guida Helal, Wilson Ozuem.
© 2019.
40 pages.
|
|
Ali Usman, Sebastian Okafor.
© 2019.
21 pages.
|
|
Md Nazmul Islam, Vivek Chitran.
© 2019.
20 pages.
|
|
Charanya Nopnukulvised, Laden Husamaldin, Gordon Bowen.
© 2019.
18 pages.
|
|
Guida Helal.
© 2019.
30 pages.
|
|
|