this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
878 points (93.8% liked)

Science Memes

11130 readers
2843 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 57 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

This study this meme is based on is completely incorrect and should be retracted. Here's a lay summary of its issues:

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2024/03/04/new-paper-debunks-the-prevalence-of-women-hunting-in-early-societies/

And the published article detailing the problems with that study's issues:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513824000497

[–] Murvel@lemm.ee 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I remember reading this simply terrible article in Scientific American; the entire article was based on this research paper referred to the meme above.

The paper was a complete fraud, and people just guzzled the cool-aid. He'll they still do, looking at this thread.

[–] Cypher@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

I refuted this article when it was published based on their incredibly biased and cherry picked data sources which were entirely baseless.

I wish more people were willing to apply critical thinking and analysis to such claims. All falsified claims are a setback and detriment to humankind's comprehension of the universe.

[–] kersplomp@programming.dev 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

To say it's "completely incorrect" is an exaggeration at best. The paper you cited is far more nuanced than that.

[–] canihasaccount@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

A bit of an exaggeration, sure. But only a bit. The lay summary of the article I referenced states the following:

Venkataraman et al. find that the paper commits every error that it was possible to make in the paper: leaving out important papers, including irrelevant papers, using duplicate papers, mis-coding their societies, getting the wrong values for “big” versus “small” game, and many others.

"commits every error that it was possible to make in the paper," and, "completely incorrect," aren't very different.