Reading Between the Lines
Posted on 06/01/2012 | 0 Comments
So it’s another new year. And of course, as traditionally expected, I have made some new year’s resolutions. One which I considered was to resolve to make no resolution but that seems a bit peevish. I did make a couple related to this blog. One was to try and be more consistent with writing and another was to try and point out how careful we need to be when we read or hear things about mental health and young people. Careful so that we do not confuse fact with fiction and careful so that we can critically consider what others write or say.
Take for example one of my favorite news stories of 2011 on adolescent depression. You can find it here: http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2011/04/05/music-books-depression.html. It made the CBC – so that is a pretty reputable news source. What does the headline say: Music Linked to Adolescent Depression. And the story is that there was a study of depressed youth conducted in Pittsburgh that showed teens who listened to the most music where about 8 times more likely to be depressed than those who listened to the least amount of music. Wow!
What does that tell us? Does it mean that music causes depression? Does it mean that teens who are depressed use music to treat their depression (remember the Biblical story of David playing music to treat the depression of King Saul)? Does it mean that teens who are depressed are too despondent or tired to engage in study, group or social activities or challenging physical pursuits? Is there some other factor at play? Did the researchers just ask a million questions and in their statistical analysis they found this relationship by chance (this is called data dredging)? Who knows?
Well, nobody knows. So why is this news story? You got me.
So what are the implications of this story? Could it be fodder for idle cocktail chatter? Will parents whose teenagers listen to music start wondering if their child is depressed? Will teens who read this scoff and dismiss the story and the idea of depression as “bulls**t”?
I do not know how news editors select news stories about adolescent mental health. Perhaps they use common sense. Perhaps they try to identify stories that have the potential to inform and educate. Perhaps they choose on the basis of emotions or sensationalism. Perhaps there are other reasons (I would think so).
Could there be negative consequences to stories chosen, or how those stories are portrayed? One huge area of concern regarding this issue is the well known contagion effect of media stories about teen suicide. Let’s keep a critical eye on how stories about youth mental health are reported in the media this year. Perhaps we will all learn something.
Happy New Year
-Stan
Photo credit: SCA Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget
Blog Tag Cloud
adhd anxiety disorders attention award awards behaviour bipolar blog brain & neurology bullying canada care carter center conference confidentiality control coping criminal justice system cruelty cutting depression discrimination doctor driving eating disordersRecent Comment
This is a great set of comments and rings very true.
I totally agree that scientists (just like everyone else) have their biases and foibles. After all, scientists are human beings too! But science is different than scientists.
The scientific method is the most objective frame that we have by which to evaluate and predict. Science is not about finding truth. It is only about being less wrong most of the time. The scientific method (experimental design and mathematics) gives us the ability to test what we believe. The scientific method is not used to prove something is correct, on the contrary, the scientific method is designed to prove that something is not correct! It is designed to test what is called the “null hypothesis”. It takes ideas that come out of left field (or wherever else they come from) and puts those ideas to an independent test.
t does not drive our beliefs. It does however challenge our beliefs. In that way it is self-correcting. Of course scientific inquiry and understanding lives within a wider social context. That is one of the great features of science.
But gravity is gravity, social context notwithstanding. And thus it is nasty, brutish and long. As Brecht said, (something like this) - the purpose of science is to save us from everlasting error.
By Christina Carew on May 11th
You can find us here too!
We would like to say thanks...
Without their help this initiative would not be possible. Thanks for you help.
Be the first to leave a comment
What do you think?