Science reporting is in general rubbish, that’s a given. So this story (I hate myself for linking to the Daily Mail) Why blue-eyed boys (and girls) are so brilliant should have just made me roll my (no pun intended) eyes and slide on by, but it’s cropping up all over the place.
I’m not feeling the best today, and as a little rage is good for the digestion, I think: Fine, I’ll go read the paper. But lo! There is no paper? There’s not really even any clues about the researcher(s). This Joanne Rowe seems to be an emeritus professor of Physical Health at Lousiville, Kentucky. No web page of her own.
So I look on the magic academic databases, and the only things I can find are:
Percept Mot Skills. 1992 75(1):91-5.
Correlation of eye color on self-paced and reactive motor performance.
Miller LK, Rowe PJ, Lund J.
Percept Mot Skills. 1994 Aug;79(1 Pt 2):671-4.
Ball color, eye color, and a reactive motor skill.
Rowe PJ, Evans P.
These studies are 13 and 15 years old! Why is this news now? I could go for the benefit of the doubt, and say there is a paper, it’s just under the Wednesday science embargo. Likelihood?
I shall eat my hat or do follow-up detective work tomorrow.
Next up: Girls Prefer Pink O RLY? or, The Boring Nature/Nurture Debate, Redux.
Just had a look at that article. Wow, what a pile of rubbish!
The only glimmer of hope is that the comments left in response to the article are overwhelmingly negative. People don’t believe everything after all!
But, I think this is a brilliant example of how dodgy science reporting/writing has become. It is based on sensationalism just as much as regular news reporting!
Thanks for highlighting this article. Great post!
If blue eyes put Lily Cole in King’s College, I can only imagine where Marilyn Manson will end up with his white eyes. Or better, I can´t imagine since my eyes and mind are not that brilliant.
What makes me laugh is the care to say “boys (and girls)” while supporting a controvertial oftalmo-chromatic determinism theory.
The story also found it’s way into the Guardian, with a rather more nuanced angle.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2152876,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=science
Don’t despair (yet) of all the press.
Hi Frank,
I just despair of most of the press :) I read that one this morning and was a little mollified. Still, it doesn’t explain where it’s come from, this interest in a couple of older-than-a-decade psychology experiments. Still looking.