Comment on ‘Close to zero impact’: US study casts doubt on effect of phone ban in schools

• PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Just on the epistemological tip, how is it being a white paper more relevant than having Bezos, Walton, and more sponsors?

  source

  • reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Typically when a news article mentions a “study” it’s a peer reviewed research article. If it’s a white paper or a working paper that is typically pointed out. Leaving that detail out is notable and probably a purposeful decision by my reckoning.

    Generally they don’t mention conflicts of interest even if they’re listed so that bit isn’t especially atypical here to me.

    source

    • PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Okay. Again, from the standpoint of how to get at what’s knowable - my complaint here with The Guardian is that they aren’t pointing out the things they should be, at all, and that the white paper nature (from such “sources”) merits exactly nothing. No further draft on any such topic from such sources could ever be credible.

      Your “typical / atypical” is you getting to my point for me, or maybe we just agree.

      source

      • reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net ⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        I think we agree! I was the original commenter in this comment thread and posted the screenshot of the sponsorship issue

        source

        • -> View More Comments