In our haste to stress the limitation of inferring cause from one simple
correlation, are we oversimplifying matter, or neglecting to inform
students about the importance of later techniques and programs of
investigation? From the Oct. APA Monitor comes a report on how
"childhood ear infections may pave the way for weight gain in
adulthood." Perhaps here, we have an example of how correlational
research may actually lead to causal inferences? It describes the
research of Dr. Bartoshuk-- and how she found associations between ear
infections and later weight gain. There was initially only an
association (secondary source reports seldom/never tell us more about
this) of childhood ear infections with body mass indices. Bartoshuk's
further statistical analyses revealed this was "an independent
contribution" to being overweight and that this now "is not a small
effect." Further speculation centers on a nerve that goes from the
tongue to the middle ear. The theory formed by this thinking is that
people develop a preference for creamy and fatty tasting foods due to
damage to this nerve--damage that is linked to the early ear infections.
Is this a good class example of how we develop theoretical ideas
and, indeed, can begin inferring causality from initial correlational
research but only after more statistical (not necessarily experimental),
work? A lot of this is due to other fine work by Bartoshuk helping to
establish the causal role for the chorda tympani nerve which is the
foundation for these ideas. As far as I know however (and I am not
expert in this field), it was not experimental work, but advanced
correlational techniques that paved the way. Another news report on
this work http://www.nbc5i.com/health/17301160/detail.html
Interesting work, Gary
Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D.
Professor, Psychology
Saginaw Valley State University
University Center, MI 48710
989-964-4491
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/7/2008 4:46 pm >>>
Babies sleeping in rooms in which fans were used have a 72% reduction
in
SIDS (crib death) risk compared with babies without fans.
Ergo, the conclusion: "Fan use may be an effective intervention for
further decreasing SIDS risk in infants in adverse sleep
environments".
Source:
Use of a Fan During Sleep and the Risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
Kimberly Coleman-Phox, MPH; Roxana Odouli, MSPH; De-Kun Li, MD, PhD
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2008;162(10):963-968
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/162/10/963
At least they said "may". But in an interview for a New York Times
article, one of the authors expressed no such reservation:
""If parents wanted to do more to reduce the baby*s SIDS risk," he [Dr
Li] said, "they can add a fan." "
(and if other guidelines, such as placing the baby on her back were
followed, the association was no longer significant)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/health/research/07sids.html?em
Stephen
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology, Emeritus
Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2600 College St.
Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7
Canada
Subscribe to discussion list (TIPS) for the teaching of
psychology at http://flightline.highline.edu/sfrantz/tips/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
