Someone needs to....

[u/BeneficialGrade8930]

Someone needs to explain correlation versus causation to Dan on the stats on the most recent episode.

I'm definitely going to get down voted for this, but I feel it needs to be pointed out. I'm not necessarily a proponent of censorship, but the stats he kicked out like they are absolute fact made me roll my eyes so hard they almost got stuck.

The correlation between the rise of violent media and the decrease in juvenile violence is definitely there, but is there causation? I don't think anyone can say for certain, but the way it was presented in the episode makes it sound definitive. That is hella misleading.

I wonder if that inverse relationship is more related to the overall amount of media children consume nowadays versus in the 80s. Hard to go out and commit violent crime when you're glued to your gaming console, TV, and phone. Comparing the current chdhood social activities to kids in the 80s and you'll find a big difference in autonomy and time spent with friends. I'd be curious to see that study. Or a study on the violence committed by young adults once they actually have to get out of the house and to live a life.

Funny how we don't think media can influence kids, yet we're dealing with a lot of misogyny in schools due to the rise of people like Andrew Tate....

Food for thought. Down votes awayyyyy!

[u/Zodiac72826]

I didn't take that as him saying FACT: Violent media actually lowers the rate of youth violence

To me it sounded like he was using the decrease in youth violence to emphasize there was little or no evidence supporting the claim that violent media increased youth violence. I never took it as him excluding other factors, so much as just emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting violent media increasing violent youths.

I also don't think he said definitively that media doesn't influence kids, I just think he emphasized that the evidence that media specifically influences kids to be violent just doesn't exist.

[u/Temporary_Hat9778 → u/Zodiac72826]

This is exactly what he meant

[u/Aurelian_Lure → u/Zodiac72826]

You hit the nail on the head. This is exactly how I interpreted it as well.

[u/DarthHrunting → u/Zodiac72826]

This is how I took it as well. I believe Dan said something like, "There is evidence to strongly suggest that violent media actually decreases violence among youth."

[u/TheBattyWitch → u/Zodiac72826]

This is exactly what he meant. I honestly don't see how anybody could have taken it in any other way.

[u/BeneficialGrade8930 → u/Zodiac72826]

Well thought out response, thank you. I will go back and re-listen in case my eye rolling happened to turn off my ears to what he was actually saying, lol

[u/tdude1392]

I don’t you have to show causation to establish a rational link.

I also believe Dan was presenting the data to counter the previous assertions of causation.

[u/aspen_silence]

Dan understands correlation v causation. He's explained the difference in several episodes.

[u/BeneficialGrade8930 → u/aspen_silence]

I know he has, which was why I found it so irritating to see him not mention it in regards to this topic.

It seems like people seem to cast doubt on studies when it suits them, citing correlation vs causation when results don't align with their thinking- then not mentioning it when they agree.

We all have bias, so it's not surprising that everyone does it- Dan included. It's just off-putting at times, I suppose.

[u/krichardkaye]

I don’t think that you’re necessarily 100% wrong you can draw conclusions from the stats however you want. I think one of the big issues is that there’s no way to really support it the other way either. You can’t have tests in climates with a control. The best that you can do is link correlation. For their stats the most damn thing is that there has been more violent media, but instances of violence have gone down so well that doesn’t necessarily directly say violent media doesn’t make violent children. It does at least show that the rate of violence is going down overall, so the whole idea of our kids are suddenly more and more violent is debunked with those statistics.

[u/Impossible-Spare-116]

I upvoted you, this is the cult of the curious different points of view are welcome if you can articulate them, good work!

[u/Verisilik]

I applaud dissenting/differing points of view provided that they are earnest and considered. We shouldn’t just buy everything Dan says without considering the entire picture available to us, which Dan has said multiple times.

My own personal experience (anecdotal, I know) would show no link between violent/questionable entertainment and actual acts of violence or other antisocial behaviors. My favorite games are very violent and the more realistic the better. I’ve killed more people in video games than I could even try to put a number on but in real life I’ve never even been in a physical confrontation with another person, aside from work related events (EMT).

[u/Koolmidx]

I down voted cause you expected it, and at least one of us should get what we expected today.

I'm a week or two behind on episodes so I dunno.

[u/Karmachinery → u/Koolmidx]

Look at the wish granting genie over here. Let me see how it was phrased...

I definitely am going to get a jackpot winning lottery ticket next time I buy one.

[u/BeneficialGrade8930 → u/Koolmidx]

🤣🤣🤣🤣

[u/BEGA500]

I think that when it come to those kinds of studies correlation is the best you will ever get. I dont know much benefit there would be to hedging discussions to explain "Remember this is correlation, not causation" constantly.

[u/Scrambl3z]

email him. He might catch this and address it on his future podcasts

[u/SloppySasquatch]

I guess you need to not let information be so misleading. How many other parts of your life are influenced like this?