4 ms·

It's a news article, not a peer-reviewed scientific study - why don't people understand the difference?

izacus 4y ago
I'm pretty sure people understand that this article is indeed unsubstantiated clickbait like most of other unsourced news articles. Well, at least outside bunch of HNers which will ignore the article and just dump their personal WFH stories in this comment section as usual.
xeromal 4y ago
I don't really understand the point of a news article where not even a poll is used. Just saying "they've heard anecdotes" does nothing but reinforce existing biases that everyone here will have. Hard data will at least convince some people who have biases but trust scientific processes to change their opinions.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  > Just saying "they've heard anecdotes" That's what a journalist does. They go out and listen to people and they tell you what they're hearing and provide context to it. You want a scientist - that's a different thing. Both are useful in practice.
  - xeromal 4y ago
    I'll agree with you that it can definitely be useful. I just don't see the usefulness in this particular instance. Work From Home is a heated topic that is sharply divided between types of personalities so articles like this will just cause circular arguments IMHO.
  - hellisothers 4y ago
    I think the issue being taken is that it’s not even clear their data is coming directly from the workers in question as opposed to “I heard anecdotes” ie 3rd party stories.
- omoikane 4y ago
  Some poll results can be found in the 3rd paragraph: "A recent survey of more than 650 Apple employees on third-party anonymous polling site Blind revealed 76% of respondents were dissatisfied with the company's return-to-office plans; 56% said they'd consider resigning over it."
  - SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
    It's frankly dishonest for the article to characterize Blind, a well-known "complain about your job" app, as a "polling site" which might have meaningful results.
edmcnulty101 4y ago
Good point. The modern mainstream news is worthless sensationalist click bait nowadays.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  News can't work if you want to wait for a peer-reviewed study for everything. It's legitimate for journalists to report what they're hearing less formally than that. And that's how it's always been - it's not a new thing.
  - izacus 4y ago
    Are you seriously unable to comprehend the nuance between "peer reviewed article" and "journalist pulling something our of their arse with zero supporting data"? Like, what's hard to understand about "there should be at least some general evidence outside personal anecdotes for conclusions about groups of people"?
kareemsabri 4y ago
Things other than peer-reviewed scientific studies also often contain data.

I'm pretty sure people understand that this article is indeed unsubstantiated clickbait like most of other unsourced news articles. Well, at least outside bunch of HNers which will ignore the article and just dump their personal WFH stories in this comment section as usual.

xeromal 4y ago

I don't really understand the point of a news article where not even a poll is used. Just saying "they've heard anecdotes" does nothing but reinforce existing biases that everyone here will have. Hard data will at least convince some people who have biases but trust scientific processes to change their opinions.

chrisseaton 4y ago
> Just saying "they've heard anecdotes" That's what a journalist does. They go out and listen to people and they tell you what they're hearing and provide context to it. You want a scientist - that's a different thing. Both are useful in practice.
- xeromal 4y ago
  I'll agree with you that it can definitely be useful. I just don't see the usefulness in this particular instance. Work From Home is a heated topic that is sharply divided between types of personalities so articles like this will just cause circular arguments IMHO.
- hellisothers 4y ago
  I think the issue being taken is that it’s not even clear their data is coming directly from the workers in question as opposed to “I heard anecdotes” ie 3rd party stories.
omoikane 4y ago
Some poll results can be found in the 3rd paragraph: "A recent survey of more than 650 Apple employees on third-party anonymous polling site Blind revealed 76% of respondents were dissatisfied with the company's return-to-office plans; 56% said they'd consider resigning over it."
- SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
  It's frankly dishonest for the article to characterize Blind, a well-known "complain about your job" app, as a "polling site" which might have meaningful results.

edmcnulty101 4y ago

Good point. The modern mainstream news is worthless sensationalist click bait nowadays.

chrisseaton 4y ago
News can't work if you want to wait for a peer-reviewed study for everything. It's legitimate for journalists to report what they're hearing less formally than that. And that's how it's always been - it's not a new thing.
- izacus 4y ago
  Are you seriously unable to comprehend the nuance between "peer reviewed article" and "journalist pulling something our of their arse with zero supporting data"? Like, what's hard to understand about "there should be at least some general evidence outside personal anecdotes for conclusions about groups of people"?

kareemsabri 4y ago

Things other than peer-reviewed scientific studies also often contain data.