August 02, 2005

Beware of phony think tanks

Here's a warning that one should check the bona fides of think tanks:

The Family Research Institute and the American College of Pediatrics are part of a rapidly growing trend in which small think tanks, researchers, and publicists who are open about their personal beliefs are providing what they portray as medical information on some of the most controversial issues of the day.

Created as counterpoints to large, well-established medical organizations whose work is subject to rigorous review and who assert no political agenda, the tiny think tanks with names often mimicking those of established medical authorities have sought to dispute the notion of a medical consensus on social issues such as gay rights, the right to die, abortion, and birth control.

Example: "The tiny American College of Pediatricians has a single employee, yet it has been quoted as a counterpoint to the 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatrics."

Now come on. Where are the fact-checkers? This is more of the "balanced" view of reporting; one side says one thing, so there's a need to find someone who'll counter it in order to appear "objective." Another quote:

Gregory M. Herek, professor of psychology at the University of California at Davis, who has followed Cameron's career, said: "Most members of the public assume that a paper published in an academic journal is a legitimate scientific study. They don't understand that journals vary widely in their quality and in the rigor of their review process. Cameron's work is methodologically weak and in many cases the conclusions he draws from his data are not valid."
Cameron is the founder of the Family Research Institute. He's managed to get his "studies" published in some tiny little journals which, in some cases, even demand payment for publication.

There's a distinction between the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association, and Psychological Reports. Unfortunately, the casual newspaper/blog reader doesn't know it, and our press seemingly doesn't either.

Posted by Linkmeister at August 2, 2005 10:32 AM | TrackBack
Comments

They're taking advantage of the lazy way journalists are trained. Also of the fact that most graduates of journalism schools are like graduates of education schools---well versed in tricks of the trade, absolutely ignorant on any subject outside their own field.

Posted by: Lance Mannion at August 6, 2005 06:09 AM