Headlines' Facts With Hidden Third Variables

Last week, our class was given a packet with headlines of different articles. Data was written underneath each headline to support or abandon it. If the data didn’t support the headline, it was due to a “third variable” to basically throw off a reader.

Example) Headline: “Diet of fish ‘can prevent’ teen violence.” The facts said:

Participants were a group of 3-year-olds given an ‘enriched diet, exercise, and cognitive stimulation,’ assuming that the enriched diet included fish. They were compared to a control group who did not go through this same program. By age 23 they were 64% less likely than a control group of children not on the program to have criminal records. The media article doesn’t include what other kids ate or did.

The data, here, does not support the headline because the data doesn’t specifically say how fish at all aids to the prevention of teen violence. The data only says that one group of toddlers were given enriched diet assuming fish was in the diet. Along with the diet was exercise, which is what young, growing bodies need to get energy, and cognitive stimulation, which is the awareness and understanding of surroundings by utilization of planned stimuli. Wouldn’t cognitive stimulation have a larger impact on whether kids grow to be violent or not rather than an enriched diet that may (or may not) include fish?

Food for thought!