Ad Hominem: Attacking the Researcher Just as Effective as Discrediting the Research

Ad Hominem: Attacking the Researcher Just as Effective as Discrediting the Research

Do facts upset you? Do you not like the results of Scientific research? Boy do we have great news for you!

That’s right, instead of analyzing studies for flawed methods or bad data, you can just call the researcher a dick!

A study conducted by Ralph Barnes , Heather Johnston , Noah MacKenzie , Stephanie Tobin , and Chelsea Taglang—presumably not dicks—sought to discover if “ad hominem” attacks on researchers have any effect on whether or not the actual research is considered valid by the public.

Two separate experiments were conducted involving a group of 439 college students and a group of 199 adults, both reading various research claims.  Each claim was accompanied by either a direct attack upon the empirical basis of the science, or a personal attack on the scientist who made the claim, and sometimes both. The individual participants were then invited to express attitudes about the claims.

“..ad hominem attacks may have the same degree of impact as attacks on the empirical basis of the science claims…”

 

Ad Hominem Attacks on Science Meme

This is an Ad Homineme

From the study, via PLOS One:

Results indicate that ad hominem attacks may have the same degree of impact as attacks on the empirical basis of the science claims, and that allegations of conflict of interest may be just as influential as allegations of outright fraud.

Ouch. Keep in mind though that this mostly applies to non-scientists trying to interpret (or misinterpret) the results of research, based simply on the impression that there was a conflict of interest.

The results of the current study indicate that laypersons significantly reduce their confidence in a claim due to knowledge of a conflict of interest. This has practical implications, as 91% of anti-vaccine websites explicitly claim that the bio-medical field is rife with conflicts of interests and this communication tactic may play a part in the success of the anti-vaccine movement.

The important takeaway is that when dealing with a science denier’s nonsense, this is yet another thing to keep an eye out for. Expecto Stupidum.

Sources and More Info

The Study on PLOS One

Ad Hominem – Wikipedia (if you’re a stupid dummy head)

Phrost

Phrost

@Phrost



Related Articles

Bullshido Earns “Least Biased” Rating from Watchdog Group

We’ve been doing our part to combat Fake News, nonsense, and BS on the Internet for over 16 years now.

This Presidential Candidate thinks WiFi Harms Children

Bullshido tends to stay away from politics, as an editorial policy. We prefer to stick to subjects that are matters

Did the Trump Administration Ban the CDC from Using Certain Terms?

There comes a point when covering the constant assault on facts gets overwhelming, when despair creeps in and you just

1 comment

Write a comment
  1. claimyourpowerblog
    claimyourpowerblog 27 February, 2018, 19:16

    Vaccines have caused immense damage, and the ad hominem of smearing any/all anti-vaccers emphasizes the brainwashed’s inability to read facts about the real damages they do.

Write a Comment

Your Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.