COC Math 140
News Report/Story on Recent Study (observational or experiment)
Maximum Points Possible: 20
DUE Date: To Be Determined
Listen to news radio (i.e., KNX 1070 News Radio, etc.) or watch the news on TV (local, national, or world), and choose one study that the organization reported on recently (within the last two weeks). For this assignment, I do not want you going to an on-line news source. This assignment is limited to radio and TV news.
Summarize the report/story that you heard on the radio/saw on TV to the best of your ability. Try to state specifics on the study. Be sure to reference your source of the study (where did you hear/see) as well as the date that you heard/saw it.
Identify at least 2 pieces of information that the reporter did not include in the report/story that we, as informed consumers, should be made aware of if we are truly to believe and trust what they reported.
Here’s an example of a story that I heard on the radio (just to give you an idea of what I expect):
September 2, 2015; KNX 1070 News Radio
PayPal claims that there is over $21 billion world-wide owed in small debts between friends and co-workers.
My questions: Did PayPal REALLY contact everyone in the world and ask them how much their friends/family owe them in small debt? I doubt that. So how did they come up with this dollar amount? Whomever they asked, what was the exact question asked (i.e., what is considered ‘small debt’?). How do they know people were really truthful with them? What is considered a ‘small debt?’ ... under what $ value?
Here’s another example of a story that I heard on the radio:
September 1, 2015
KNX 1070 News Radio
Students at the University of Minnesota researched the question, “Do drones have an effect on wild life?” Researchers observed black bears and the black bears didn’t seem effected by drones flying nearby. Then researchers fit bears with heart monitors and flew drones nearby the four bears. The heart monitors showed higher than expected heart rates in all of the four bears.
My questions: Were the same bears used for both situations? Was there a bear control group? Is four bears sufficient to lead us to believe that there is a cause-and-effect relationship? Is this an experiment or an observational study? Is the higher heart rate due to stress (bad high heart rate) or is it due to excitement (good high heart rate)? Or is the ‘higher’ heart rate just due to sampling variability (not statistically significant)?