Suggested Readings: Changing Minds, Living Longer, Not Retweeting

Extra Credit Suggested Readings from JSTOR Daily Editors

Extra Credit: Our pick of stories from around the web that bridge the gap between news and scholarship. Brought to you each Tuesday from the editors of JSTOR Daily.

Can you ever change anyone’s mind about anything? (FiveThirtyEight)
by Christie Aschwanden and Maggie Koerth-Baker
In 2014, a study of canvassers promoting the legalization of same-sex marriage included some striking findings about how people’s minds can be changed. The trouble was, the paper turned out to be a fraud. Now, the researchers who uncovered the fabricated data have published their own findings on the topic. Turns out, in some cases, changing minds really is possible.

The complex relationship between health and wealth (NPR)
by Jim Zarroli
We know rich Americans live longer than poor ones. But a new study finds the story is a lot more complicated than that. Geography plays a big role in the lifespans of people with low incomes.

Retweets are not comprehension (Pacific Standard)
by Tom Jacobs
Before you retweet anything, stop and read this. A new study by Chinese researchers finds that sharing a post on a microblogging site like Twitter can actually make you less likely to really understand what the post said.

When anthropomorphism is just good science (The New York Times)
by Frans de Waal
For many biologists, anthropomorphism is a serious sin. But, as more studies tell us all the time, creatures like chimpanzees are a lot like us. So insisting that we pretend apes don’t laugh and kiss may distort, rather than clarify, our understanding of them. Here’s our take on the story.

Economically segregated neighborhoods are tough on kids (Slate)
by Elissa Strauss
New research finds things improved significantly for kids whose families got help to move out of areas of concentrated poverty. That’s not good news for the country, because economic segregation of neighborhoods has gotten worse in recent years.

Have you seen a story online that does a good job of bridging the gap between the news and scholarship? Or something that seems particularly well-researched? Let us know and we may include it in next week’s roundup. Email us at jstordaily_submissions (at) jstor (dot) org.

Comments are closed.