Haven't done this in a little while, so let's have a spot of fun Here's a headline in the Daily Mail. It seems...unlikely that this is true Let's have a look and seepic.twitter.com/ebYYtz3qrA
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Then we get to the good (painful?) bit, where the authors dichotomized their continuous variables to make them easier to analyze This is, uh, not best practice statisticallypic.twitter.com/8t1gNRZqgz
So, that's not great, but on to the main result! Digit ratio had no impact on "masculine" vs "feminine" food choice Umpic.twitter.com/w1HHYZ1Ba1
Oh right, but a subgroup analysis showed a result! If we only look at hungry participants, those with a "masculine" digit ratio chose more "masculine" food choices (p=0.045)pic.twitter.com/qYOP3kRkWd
Here's the graph from the paper. So the red and blue bars on the right are statistically significantly different (p=0.045) whereas none of the other bars are different to each other (they checked)pic.twitter.com/k3X10zgNsp
It's also a touch worrying that the authors appear not to have controlled for multiple comparisons in their analysis, especially given this very marginally significant result Could've just been luck of the draw!
On that note, it's also a bit odd that there doesn't appear to be a statistical analysis section in the paper. Like, at all. I can't even find what statistical software they used to perform these analyses!
It's also worth noting that there is perhaps another reason that people who were hungry would go for the more "masculine" food option (salad vs burger???)pic.twitter.com/XVdJObMv6j
So the study has...problems. Quite a few of them. These differences are, at best, very modest, and even the distinction between "masculine" and "feminine" foods is...not great
Moreover, I have to wonder whether the sample - 216 Chinese adults recruited/paid through WeChat - are generalizable to many other populations
Going back to the headline, I think we would all look on it a bit more dubiously than we did beforehttps://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1356429289768382466?s=20 …
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.