Peer Review Madness and Sources!

[NonPatrician]

Hello,

 

I recently began a discussion on the book of face regarding spanking. I passed along some facts and communicated the information that I've collected over time from many videos found here.

 

Boy did I strike some nerves! I have received most of the usual pro-spanking arguments in response and am working on a follow up message in video format where I'll be presenting the evidence in detail along with some reason based points.

 

One of the dissenters came back with the non-argument, "I disagree with your assessment, and posit that the scientific data presented is biased and lacks peer review."

 

I get this type of response so often on various topics and I'd love to know how others handle it. Do I, yet again, spend days searching, collecting, and organizing the source data? How do I even tell if this stuff has been peer reviewed? 

 

I checked the sources link for the facts about spanking video (http://www.fdrurl.com/spanking) and many of the links are broken / stale. I feel like I'm mired in another research project that once complete will be dismissed out of hand.

 

I would like to know if there is a place I can point to with some solid, non-biased, peer'd research. But I would also like to know how others push through this, "I doubt your claims and sources of evidence," rebuttal.

 

These are people I care about with children so for their sake and the others I may reach with my youtube channel I really feel driven to do a good job here.

 

Thanks for any advice or clarity you can offer.

[Anuojat]

Well Gershoff would be one person to look fowards at:

 

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2002/06/spanking.aspx

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Gershoff%20ET[Author]&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=25358960

 

But certainly other scientists should be looked at, she jsut popped unto my mind immidiately.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=spanking+children

 

BUT also its important to understand that if people demand peer rewiew process because they think its biased IMMIDIATELY after you mention objections (moral and scientific) to spanking, that tells me atkleast that these people are not curious but just do a neejerk reaction. Because getting someone ire from people along with assertion if bias immidiately either means these people somehow have studied spanking and know biases in the field... or theyre jsut making it up and saying bias because thats and easy way to dodge the mroal question or plant dout in the othe rpesrson midn and get them to shut up.

 

It sound to me like person in the 1950s/1960s getting irritated because you tell him that smoking it bad for you just as the studies started to come out about it.

[percentient]

"Here, have some words that are supposed to make me sound sophisticated and skeptical."

 

Yeah, announcing that the research presented doesn't match your high standards for objectivity (read: approval of authorities), doesn't cut it. If lazily disputing everything presented is okay, there's definitely grounds to dispute peer review. How do you know that it indicates reliability? It just means that about two people have approved of the end result. Which might even be a bad thing; papers regularly get rejected because they don't conform to the expectations of the reviewers. And sometimes explicit nonsense gets through.

 

There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial, no literature too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, no argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified, and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.

 

-- editors at Journal of the American Medical Association

 

Secondly, what is their evidence for breaking the near-universally accepted law of non-violence? Surely the most mainstream, most peer-reviewed publication would be Wikipedia? You won't find a justification there http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanking#Research

[NonPatrician]

Thank you both for reply'ing. Sorry for not responding sooner, I was lost in research. You both made excellent points that were helpful.

 

And thank you for the sources!

 

I'm pulling a great deal of the facts from Stefan's videos, I hope that's ok with him. I'll post the video here when it's complete.

[J-William]

Thank you both for reply'ing. Sorry for not responding sooner, I was lost in research. You both made excellent points that were helpful.

 

And thank you for the sources!

 

I'm pulling a great deal of the facts from Stefan's videos, I hope that's ok with him. I'll post the video here when it's complete.

Cribbing some facts or even taking the whole video would be fine :-P

I'm pretty sure he's cool with you doing anything you can think of to spread the message of peaceful parenting

[Lingum]

He didn't provide any reasoning, but rather uses peer review as magical words. Is there a reason why he should reject non-peer reviewed data on this topic? The fact that he doesn't provide any reasoning for this decision, only serves to tell you he has no idea why peer review is important in the first place. He has only provided an arbitrary standard, peer review, not a principle. The problem here is that he thinks his assertion is limited to this instance. He can't accept information that hasn't been peer reviewed, because peer review is a better standard. Clearly, it's not limited to this instance. It's endless. There's always a better standard.
 
His demand for peer review isn't a scientific one, but rather a complete rejection of science in favor of nihilism. I find that people who have had some exposure to science, but have no understanding of its origins and foundation, commit this fallacy every time they're faced with scientific conclusions they dislike. This is what science is to them, a tool to cower people into submitting to their beliefs, while arbitrarily rejecting information that makes them feel uncomfortable. Consider it an admission of inadequacy.
 

But I would also like to know how others push through this, "I doubt your claims and sources of evidence," rebuttal.

 
In this case, you can't. His position isn't a reasonable or scientific one. Like Stefan frequently says; "You can't reason somebody out of a position they weren't reasoned into." He is managing the anxieties this topic brings up, by minimizing exposure to it, but without admitting defeat. This way, he can suppress a bubbling epiphany relating to his own life. Discussions like these aren't always pointless, because the opposition you provide him can results in some self-reflection eventually. However, it's important that you be aware this isn't a scientific discussion. You are spending a lot of effort researching, but he will inevitably move the goal post each time.