Friday, August 05, 2005

What happened to science?
It seems to me that scientists no long understand the concept of causation, and how it contrasts with correlation. CNN.com reports on a USA Today piece:

Women who cross their legs provocatively, wear short skirts or massage a man's shoulders at work get fewer pay raises and promotions, according to Friday's USA Today.

The newspaper, citing a Tulane University study, said 49 percent of MBA graduates polled admitted that they have tried to advance in their careers by sometimes engaging in certain sexual behaviors, including sending flirty e-mails and wearing revealing clothing.

The respondents who said they never engaged in such activity earned an average of three promotions, versus two for the group that had employed sexuality. Those who said they never used sexuality were, on average, in the $75,000-$100,000 income range; the other group fell, on average, into the next range, $50,000 to $75,000[...]

"We argue that there are negative consequences for women who use sexuality in the workplace," Brief told the newspaper.
Maybe women who make $50,000 to $75,000 are just more likely to be the flirtatious type? I know that men who make over $100,000 are probably more likely to play golf, but that doesn't in any way mean that they're making what they do because they play golf. Maybe there's more in the study, but what CNN has provided here suggests that this Tulane group has reached a conclusion based on insufficient evidence.

1 comment:

Dave Justus said...

I think the bigger problem is that media doesn't understand that University Professor is not a synonym for Scientist.

Arthur Brief is the Lawrence Martin Chair of Business at Tulane’s A.B. Freeman School of Business.

The guy teaches business. He may be a good teacher. He may be giving great advice here. He is not a scientist though.