I’m addicted to reading the news on the Internet, even when I know that it’s only going to get me upset. I try not to click on links that might seem inflammatory to minimize the upset that invariably comes with being outraged at what “they” are doing. Sometimes, I get tricked, and then I’m all sucked in like a bad afternoon drama that seems to have a spell cast on me. One topic I like reading up on are studies. I prefer them to be scientifically sound, but sometimes a little study can be a reason to do a larger one. That’s where it really gets interesting. Other times, I’m left shaking my head. It’s not that they are necessarily stupid studies; they are just within the realm of ordinary, everyday thinking.Like this one: Men and Women Have Different Views on Infidelity. How many times do we have to see these kinds of studies conducted over and over again until someone somewhere says, “Nope! Not doing that one. Already been done too many times, and we haven’t learned anything new”? I don’t mind a good laugh now and then. The people at the Annals of Improbable Research who give out the Ig Nobel Awards seem to have a good time poking fun at ridiculous studies. This year’s winners included, among others:
- Frictional Coefficient under Banana Skin
- Seeing Jesus in Toast: Neural and Behavioral Correlates of Face Pareidolia
- Dogs are sensitive to small variations of the Earth’s magnetic field
At least, they are not trying to pass off the studies that come across their desks as being anything other than comical.