Ads make many claims about their products.
We read these claims with a healthy skepticism. But we like to believe in the things we want and multimedia advertisements are good at making us want. Our skepticism gets weakened by the glitter of the ads and the claims they make about the product. The pull to buy a product is even more powerful if we see all our friends enjoying the product. In the past, brute, natural skepticism was adequate to keep us safe in the market place. But that was then and this is now. We are bombarded by facts. We are told they are scientific facts. The question is, what do we really know. ARE THESE FACTS FOR REAL?
The Word “Research” and Science
In advertisements we see statements such as,”research has shown ….”. When we hear the word “research,’ we assume that is scientific research, and it probably is. However, we also assume all scientific research is the same quality. That assumption is wrong. Not all scientific research reveals facts of nature equally. Scientific research is complex and scientific facts are as complex, if not more. If you are going to consume scientific research and base your decisions on it, and I recommend you do, then you need to understand a little about it. In the market place, it is always, buyer beware!! With research, the issue of truthfulness is not whether the results are true or false, it is rather how true are they. Scientific statements are never absolute. They deal in probabilities. Science makes observations about nature, in this case your iPhone, and asks only one question: “What is the probability that the events observed happened by chance?” It never asks whether the results of the observations were true or false. It only asks whether the results of the observations happened by chance. So if science tells you that the probability was 35% that the results of the observations happened by chance, then you have to decide whether the statement based on those observations is true or untrue. For example, if an iPhone was observed being dropped into a lake on 100 occasions and on only 5 of those occasions did the iPhone receive water damage, then the probability was 5% that an iPhone would receive damage if dropped into water. But the fact that you are told is that the iPhone is water resistant. You have to then decide if the observations support the statement that the iPhone is water resistant. But it gets better. Even if you decide that the iPhone is water resistant, do those observations mean that your particular iPhone will be water resistant every time it is dropped into water in every situation? The statement that iPhones are water resistant matters to you only as it applies to your particular iPhone.
Does The Research Apply to You; Do You Have a Good IPhone
You don’t care what the results are for the average iPhone. The average iPhone is not yours. Now, the research results apply to you only under certain conditions. If any of these conditions are not present, then the results may not apply to you. It’s not enough to simply have all the facts about the apple iPhone. Let’s take the tests for water resistance in the iPhone. First, the iphones used in the research have to be very similar to yours, like twins. A mere sibling resemblance is not enough. Secondly?, the water conditions have to be similar to those in which you dropped you iPhone. How deep into the water did your iPhone go? How many times were the test iphones submersed in water and how many times did you drop you iPhone into the water? What chemicals were present in the water that you dropped you iPhone into; were those chemicals present in the test water? How old was your iPhone when you dropped it into water; how old were the test iPhone? How long did you iPhone remain submersed in water; how long were the test iphones submersed? In other words, the conditions of the test iphones have to be like the conditions of your iPhone if you are to conclude that the results of the research apply to your iPhone. To the extent the conditions present in the research tests are different from the conditions to which your iPhone was exposed, then the research results cannot be applied to your case. Advertisements never give this information and the manufacturers rarely do. Of course, nobody asks for it. But this is not all you need to know before accepting the results of a scientific study.
Is the Difference Real?
So you are told that the iPhone camera is better than cameras on any android phone. If you are to accept that as a scientific fact, you need to know more. You might want to know how much better, but what you need to know is whether the difference is a real difference. By a “real difference” is meant, did the observed difference happen by chance. Were those observations just random events or would they be seen again if someone made further observations? When someone does an “experiment” and submerges an iPhone into a lake one time and observes no damage, we don’t know if the iPhone survived the event by chance or if it was a characteristic of the iPhone. This is research, but it is not scientific research. Let’s assume one person submerged an iPhone is a lake at a depth of 2 feet and left it submerged for 5 minutes; another person submerged an Android at a depth of 20 feet and left it submerged for 30 minutes. Examination of the iPhone showed it to have no water damage while examination of the android showed water damage. Let’s further assume someone concluded that iphones are water resistant and androids are not based on the results of this test. Is this a legitimate scientific fact? No. The testing conditions were not the same as required by Science in order to compare the two tests. There was a difference, but it wasn’t real. The results of the test might not have been real for other reasons. Assume the two phones were submerged under the exactly same conditions, and 5 iphones and 5 androids were given the test treatment. When examined, 4 of the iphones showed water damage while only 2 of the androids did. Maybe the results of the one trial initially described had happened by chance. Chance is sneaky and is always playing tricks on us.
Was Everything Checked
It is easily observable that when a cell phone is submerged in water it is frequently damaged by the water. Cell phones, like iphones, that may features such as water resistance, frequently do not suffer water damage when submerged. But what, exactly, does the damage? It is the water or something in the water? Issues such as this generally don’t get investigated. To make a claim about a product, the research studies must have examined or controlled for all the important factors involved in the results observed by the investigation. We assume all the important factors have been examined when the important factors may not be all known. If important factors have not been examined by the study, the results of the study may be due to random events. This compromises any conclusions drawn from the research.
Change is Inevitable
Science doesn’t stay in one place; it is always in motion. Scientific facts are always changing. We align scientific facts with the truth and assume that scientific facts, like the truth, never changes. Scientific facts only do one thing, they explain a particular set of observations, a particular set of data. As new observations are made, the data set grows. New conclusions are made from the larger data set. The scientific fact changes. It is not that the first fact was wrong now and the second fact is correct. The first fact correctly explains the first data set and the second fact correctly explains the larger data set. When you say a scientific fact is true, you need to specify which data set it explains. A scientific fact is true relative to some specific data set. No scientific fact is true relative to all possible data sets.
Because scientific facts constantly change, we need to ask questions about the conditions and procedures that support those facts. Information is complex; it should never be taken on face value. No advertisement will ever give you all the information; you will need to look beyond what you are told. This is just the way the world is.