Announcing studies with results

There are a lot of studies out there, and most of them are from biased organizations. Most of these studies can't be trusted. Some studies involve asking loaded questions to the public. Others try to generate all sorts of stats in hopes that one can be extracted to support a pre-determined narrative. For this post, I wanted to discuss something that I gave away in the title.


Very few studies are announced ahead of time. Instead, organizations have been waiting for the results before they announce a study's existence. While this may sound good on paper, there can be serious implications for this practice.

I have long insisted that if people truly want quick answers, they should look for people who are going against their bias. This is rare with studies. Why? Because the organizations running these studies can control the release of data. If such an organization finds evidence that contradicts its purpose, that organization can simply ignore their own study. Since these studies aren't announced ahead of time, nobody will be aware of them. People are not going to prod others for the results of a study that they don't know existed.

Studies have a margin of error. Even if their own studies continuously oppose their views, organizations can hide results until one study emerges in their favor. I suspect that we have seen this with video games. Semi-neutral sources typically show no connections between violence and gaming. Anti-gaming organizations can generally find evidence to back their beliefs. Why wouldn't they? If there is no difference, there is about a 50% chance that a study will show gamers will be slightly more violent.

This isn't just about studies. Polls frequently have the same problem. There are other issues similar to studies and polls. For example, look at Elizabeth Warren's DNA test. Warren kept calling herself a Native American. This was disputed. To defend her claims, she released the results of the DNA test. She never announced that she was having her DNA tested. More than likely, she wasn't convinced of her own claims and decided that she could withhold the results if she wasn't satisfied.