> that makes this a bit of a dumb study Only if you assume no intent on the part of the study's authors. For example, I wonder if they would have had quite a d

> that makes this a bit of a dumb study Only if you assume no intent on the part of the study's authors. For example, I wonder if they would have had quite a different result if they'd used, say, 14 year olds. Or a mix of ages. I wasn't overly encouraged that two of their citations were for the Biophilia Hypothesis. An interesting book, for sure, but not exactly rigorous science. I was left with the definite impression that this study was as much about politics as science. To that end, maybe not dumb just not particularly impartial.