Separator

Numbers Matter: Why people will believe anything on the Internet

Default_picture
Thursday, June 02, 2011
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom James DeRosa

What do divorce, famine, high-school violence, war, me stubbing my toe yesterday, the Challanger disaster, the fall of the Roman Empire, 9/11, Lucifer's fall from grace, and the release of M. Night Shyamalan's The Last Airbender all have in common?

They were all caused by video games, of course!

(Also, as an update, The Escapist now reports that Divorce Online may have paid survery respondents £250 to tell their stories.)

Recently, the gaming sphere has been abuzz with news of a divorce study performed by the "prestigious" legal institution Divorce Online. The study claimed that a significant amount of new divorce filings in 2010 were due to spousal neglect. More specifically, the study indicates that video games are at the root of many couples' marital problems. The Daily Mail -- which also isn't exactly the most reliable source -- was the first to run this story. Gaming sites soon followed suit.


Are we getting divorced? Or are we in a commercial for
depression meds? Maybe it's both....

Even if you agree with the conclusions of the study in a general sense (say, that video games can be damaging to a marriage), this particular study features a couple glaring issues that should prevent any news outlet from taking it seriously. The Daily Mail reported that "Of those wives who cite unreasonable behaviour for ending their marriage, 15 percent believe their partners put gaming before them." The dubious methodology of the study doesn't successfully prove this point. For instance, here are two simple problems:

  • The Divorce Online sample size was only 200 people. (This is exceptionally tiny!)
  • This statistic only reflects Divorce Online users. (It only takes into account people who used DivorceOnline.com to file for divorce. The "researchers" didn't attempt to get a random sample of divorcees, which would have made this study a lot more meaningful.)

What does this mean?

 

To start with, even Pew studies, which many statisticians refuse to take seriously, have samples sizes of at least 1000. To make matters worse, this "study" by Divorce Online doesn't say anything meaningful about the average divorcee. It only looks at a) women who b) cited unreasonable behavior as grounds for divorce and c) blamed video games for the neglect. It's a subset of a subset of a subset of divorcees.

Honestly, the most meaningful thing someone could glean from this data is that Divorce Online saw a tiny increase in something -- namely, video-game-related neglect -- and thought they might get a few clicks out of it. I guess they were right.

I know that sites like Joystiq and The Escapist are supposed to report the news with as much impartiality as possible, but really, when The Daily Mail promulgates something this glaringly fallacious as a meaningful statistic, some skepticism is in order.

Really, you should never regard anyone who uses god-awful stock photos on their homepage as a reliable fact-finding institution:


Hello from 1995!


You can read more from Mark at 2 Gays 1 Joystick.

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (17)
Alexemmy
June 01, 2011

I'm gonna call them just so I can talk to that exact girl! I mean, what with all of my Portal 2 playing recently I'm sure to be getting a divorce soon anyway, and she is clearly waiting for my call.

Ff6gast
June 02, 2011

I'm so glad that someone thinks critically of research methods and statistics within our culture, and has the altruistic nature to write an article informing our community of the falsehoods that can be spread through blind acceptance of such misleading 'facts.'  Makes me wonder what Video Game's mortal enemy, Sports (and sports related activities,) scored in the same data set?

In regards to subjects of the study being paid, the issue is more than likely irrelevant, as most subjects within many professional and university studies are often paid for their involvement... now whether or not Divorce Online coerced particular results with the promise of money is a different matter :D

Default_picture
June 02, 2011

Yeah, this organization is obviously doing everything they can to build hype. The gaming community has always been a prime target for mass media uproar; this may unfortunately continue, so long as certain media outlets can get a reaction from the non-gaming community members.

Default_picture
June 02, 2011

This is like that study that claimed Facebook was responsible for some divorces because a certain percentage of divorces involved people who hooked up with others after talking to them on Facebook. Even if there was a correlation between Facebook use and divorce, it doesn't mean Facebook was responsible. The kind of people who start potential affairs on Facebook may be the kind of people who would do that through other means if Facebook wasn't there. Likewise, the kind of person that would let videogames get in the way of their marriage may just have the kind of addictive personality that would allow it to happen with any hobby. On the other hand, the kind of people who cite videogames as something that takes up too much of their partner's time may just be batshit insane people who would blame the first obvious scapegoat for the fact that they demand too much attention. The videogame study really doesn't even show a correlation in the general population, much less the causality of marriage problems.

Snapshot_20100211_14
June 02, 2011
Instead of this, maybe you should write an article justifying the name of the website you write for.
Default_picture
June 02, 2011

What should I "justify"? I'm gay and I run a video game blog. It's a fun, catchy, name.

Snapshot_20100211_14
June 02, 2011
It's just annoying that gay's want equal rights, yet segregate themselves from everything else. While I understand most gaming sites cater to straight audiences, I don't see Straightgamer or blackgamer.com. I just don't understand the point or why it matters that you're gay. There was just a great discussion about this on Destructoid, that's the only reason I'm bringing it up.
Jayhenningsen
June 02, 2011
It certainly made me laugh, Mark. I thought it was clever.
Default_picture
June 02, 2011

Probably none of my business, but Shawn, why didn't you just contact Mark privately? What's the point of derailing conversation on a completely unrelated article?

Default_picture
June 02, 2011

 

It's just a fun name for our website. Rather than having people listen to our podcast or read our blog then say, "wait, are you guys GAY?", I'd rather preemptively tell people that yes, I like men. We don't only report on gay issues, but I do sometimes mention things that are gay-specific (like guys I think are hot, or the fact that I date men). If someone wants to have "blackgamer.com" or "straightgamer.com" I have no problem with that.

We try to be inclusive, rather than exclusive, so I'd rather be myself than hide anything about my personality on our website and podcast. Plus "2 gays 1 Joystick" is just a fun name. I certainly don't see this as a form of self segregation. I also don't understand the correlation between defining ourselves as gay and equal rights...that's a bit of a stretch.

 

Best,

Mark

Toejam_earl
June 02, 2011

I, personally, enjoy gay games. Like that one where I was all gay and did gay stuff with other gay people.

Oh...wait...you mean THAT "gay". Never you mind then.

I'm sorry to peanut gallery, but whilst I really liked the article, this discussion commanded a comment. I honestly can say I have no idea what the fuck went on up there. Is it even related to the article?

I can't even have a legitimate response to this article now because I will feel all "gay" if I use the phrase "sample-size". Hehehe ;)

Jayhenningsen
June 02, 2011
Shawn - Your comment contains a number of logical fallacies. First, identifying yourself as a member of a particular group does not equate to segregating oneself. Second, there are already a number of gaming websites that devote themselves to various groups including African-Americans, women, and people of other ethnicities. Third, using the above examples, both women and African-Americans fought for equal rights in the past, and both formed groups to identify with like-minded people. Do you think they segregated themselves, and are you annoyed with them too? Fourth, regardless of how you feel a particular group is acting, how could you possibly be annoyed by anyone wanting equal rights? Kinda makes me wonder what really bothers you so much that you feel the need to make such comments in the first place.
Snapshot_20100211_14
June 02, 2011
You're probably right... But at the time why should I have to contact him privately? He's clearly comfortable with the fact he's gay, and it was a simple question, if a little blunt. I was more or less curious about his stance, due to the other discussion beforehand. I should have made that more clear. I don't have an issue with the site name directly, especially because of how he presented it. I would like to see how he feels about that topic in general, though. I hope it doesn't seem like I was calling him out directly for being gay, I'm not one of those people. I perhaps was just a little blunt. My apologies.
Snapshot_20100211_14
June 02, 2011
Fair enough. I think everyone took this the wrong way. I should have clarified that ot was based on an earlier discussion. Sorry if you were offended, it wasn't the goal, it was more for discussion's sake.
Snapshot_20100211_14
June 02, 2011
Eh, you took what I said out of context by a lot. The comment had background that I didn't mention, which is my fault.
Snapshot_20100211_14
June 02, 2011
It may just be better to delete the comments. This is what this site tries to avoid, and it wasn't my intention.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.