If someone links you a "study" its about as useful as them linking a random news article. In both cases, they only read the headline and maybe the summary under it which are designed to support the author's already decided outcome.
Even worse, journalists can editorialize things and make the truth a lot harder to parse from the story. Studies can do little of that, leaving the facts right on the table for anyone with the ability to read to find all the faulty setups and intentional leading that undermines the clickbait.
So if someone links you a study to support their point, you can probably safely assume they couldn't even defend that singular study let alone the point resting on it.
If its paywalled and you can't read it, then maybe you shouldn't be assuming it proves your point and using it in arguments. Unless its groundbreaking and foundational, in which case you should find some way to access it.
Nobody should have to pay, but they also shouldn't be putting themselves in the position where if they don't pay they are spouting off ignorance.
Your link doesn't say "women's bias against men." It says, "pro-women/anti-men bias." These aren't the same because men can be pro-women/anti-men. Implicit bias studying is also junk science.
If someone links you a "study" its about as useful as them linking a random news article. In both cases, they only read the headline and maybe the summary under it which are designed to support the author's already decided outcome.
Even worse, journalists can editorialize things and make the truth a lot harder to parse from the story. Studies can do little of that, leaving the facts right on the table for anyone with the ability to read to find all the faulty setups and intentional leading that undermines the clickbait.
So if someone links you a study to support their point, you can probably safely assume they couldn't even defend that singular study let alone the point resting on it.
If its paywalled and you can't read it, then maybe you shouldn't be assuming it proves your point and using it in arguments. Unless its groundbreaking and foundational, in which case you should find some way to access it.
Nobody should have to pay, but they also shouldn't be putting themselves in the position where if they don't pay they are spouting off ignorance.
You can just message the people in involved in the study and they will send it to you for free FYI.
Or use scihub
Welcome back
Your link doesn't say "women's bias against men." It says, "pro-women/anti-men bias." These aren't the same because men can be pro-women/anti-men. Implicit bias studying is also junk science.
Nope. This is you projecting your non-thought process onto me.
Yass kween slay