Researching Know-how

  Research is an important aspect in our current world. It is what allows us to keep up to date on new information in different subjects, and possibly change our actions or habits accordingly. For example, autism spectrum disorder is constantly being researched and new studies are released just as often. However, in order to ensure that you are able to understand that research and know if it is reliable or not, there are certain things that are vital to know. 

    First, samples. Put simply, a sample from a study is the people who are being studied. Choosing a sample for a study can be very difficult and there can be some shortcuts that researchers take that can possible lower their study's credibility. One, Sample size. Sample size is how many people are participating in the study. If researchers choose to have fewer participants, they risk the chance that their sample will be a poor representation of the whole they are trying to represent. For example, if you talk to 10 children about what their favorite food is, it will be unlikely that just 10 children will reflect the choices other children would choose. A high sample size conquers this problem. Second is convenience sampling. This is when researchers reach out to a sample of people that are easy to reach. Maybe all in the same school, city, or maybe even just their family. This has the same problem as small sample size: the sample will not be representative of the whole population. 

    Secondly, comparison groups. Comparison groups is the subject that studies are preformed against. For example, we may want to see how much private school teachers get paid compared to public school teachers. The reason you want to look for a good comparison group in studies is that with the group, we can really see what the results mean. For example, we may want to test how well a certain medication works. We would give the medication to our sample group, and then compare their results to that of a group who did not have the medication (the comparison group). This again, creates credibility in a researcher's study. 

    Third, you will want to look at what the study claims to do. For example, the study of the beforementioned medication may claim that the medication is the best around. However, as we look closely, we see that the medication data was only tested against those who did not have the medication. This only proves that the medication is better than having none at all, not that it is better than other medications. Maybe the medication was compared against another medication, but not others. Again, this does not support the researcher's claim that they found their medication to be the best. 

    All of these things are important to know and understand as we study the research accessible to us. We cannot allow ourselves to become confused by studies that may not have much credibility to them. I will now talk about a series of studies that fail in many aspects in all of these areas of importance. 

    This week, I studied a collection of different studies that altogether claimed that "Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents". However, the collection of studies was riddled with holes and poor decisions. First, there were many issues with the samples that the studies used. Many of the samples were only around 50 people. That is not very many, and is not going to represent a whole population like the studies all claim. Additionally, the samples used were mostly Caucasian. Minorities were not included in most of the studies. This creates a bias, as, on average, most minorities have many disadvantages that Caucasians may not. Lastly, most of the studies also seem to use convenience sampling. This again, decreases the chances of the sample representing the whole population. 

    The second large issue was with the comparison groups. A whopping 26 out of the 59 studies had no comparison group. Having no comparison group largely invalidates research as there is no way to see if the data holds up against other data already gathered. Because these studies did not include comparison groups, we cannot really believe that the children raised by lesbian or gay parents are just as well off as children raised by heterosexual parents. 

    Lastly, the study claims to prove that children raised by lesbian or gay parents are not disadvantaged in any way from children raised by heterosexual parents. So it makes sense that most comparison groups would be heterosexual parents right? Well, not according to the researchers. There were a total of 26 studies that did not have a comparison group of heterosexual couples. These instead use single mothers or fathers as comparison groups the majority of the time. It is already known in our world that single parents (of no fault of their own) are disadvantaged from a family with two, married parents. The other comparison group used widely was divorced parents, which are also disadvantaged from married couples. This is not the only issue. Many of the studies research things that have nothing to do with a child's development. For example, child responses to the parent coming out, parent reports on children, parental motives and desires, couple relationships, and more. Only 9 of the 59 studies actually are studying how the children's development is affected by their parents. It is very easy to understand why this does not make sense. 

    I am not bashing on LGBTQ+ parents. I just want everyone to understand that we need to ensure that the research we hear and accept is actually accurate and credible. If it is not, we can be led to make decisions that are poor for us, our families, and others around us.