|
|
|
|
|
by zimpenfish
3184 days ago
|
|
I'd also venture that Pokemon are almost certainly deliberately designed and focus tested to be recognisable and distinguishable because, well, that's how you market stuff and that makes this a bit of a dumb study. Mother Nature, alas, does not have this luxury. |
|
Only if you assume no intent on the part of the study's authors. For example, I wonder if they would have had quite a different result if they'd used, say, 14 year olds. Or a mix of ages.
I wasn't overly encouraged that two of their citations were for the Biophilia Hypothesis. An interesting book, for sure, but not exactly rigorous science.
I was left with the definite impression that this study was as much about politics as science. To that end, maybe not dumb just not particularly impartial.