Running head: ANALYZING THE CLAIMS OF SCENARIO C 1

Analyzing the Claims of Scenario C through the Scientific and Critical Thinking Lens
Ryerson University
Betty Wang
ANALYZING THE CLAIMS OF SCENARIO C 2

Analyzing the Claims of Scenario C through the Scientific and Critical Thinking Lens

Correlation VS. Causation

In Scenario C, a study has found that Internet Explorer (IE) users have significant lower

IQ averages in comparison to users of other major web browsers, including Firefox and Opera.

This led to the conclusion that utilizing IE browsers causes cognitive decline. Although the

interpretation of the results is indeed convincing, it is important to note that a correlation

between two variables does not imply a definite causation between the variables (Lilienfeld et

al., 2014). In fact, to view it differently, it may be that individuals with lower IQ preferred to use

IE more as IE is the default browser in all Windows computers. Alternatively, it is possible that a

third variable, such as poor research design, contributed to this negative correlation. Researchers

can never be sure of the direction in which the correlation occurs, or whether an undetectable

third variable exists. Therefore, it is erroneous to equate correlation and causation.

Extraordinary Claims

The article has made an extraordinary claim stating that using IE is leading to cognitive

decline. The article only claimed that IE is reducing the intelligence level of individuals, but no

scientific evidence was used to support the phenomenon. In order to conclusively state that one

variable causes changes in the other variable, there must be strong scientific evidence to support

the claim (Lilienfeld et al., 2014). When viewing the functionality of all web browsers, it is safe

to conclude that web browsers allow the user to access the resources in the World Wide Web

(Merriam-Webster, 2014). Then, the question becomes why IE users would decline cognitively,

when all other browsers offer similar functionality. Again, the article fails to provide enough

evidence to support their extraordinary claims.

Ruling Out Rival Hypotheses

ANALYZING THE CLAIMS OF SCENARIO C 3

When analyzing the claim of one source, it is crucial to also perceive the claim from

another perspective with an alternative explanation (Lilienfeld et al., 2014). Another explanation

that can explain why IE usage is correlated with lower IQ, is that individuals with lower IQ

preferred to use IE as it is preinstalled into all Windows system computers, as well for its

simplicity and lack of add-ons. A second alternative explanation is that since the sample size did

not indicate how many users of each browser participated, thus, there is a possibility that more IE

browsers have participated in the study, which would lead to a skew in the mean. Evidently,

alternative hypotheses can explain the correlation equally well. Hence, more research must be

conducted to rule out these rival hypotheses.

Talk of Proof Instead of Evidence

Throughout the article, the author continuously states that the findings of the study proves

that using IE leads to cognition deterioration. In the scientific realm, it is difficult to prove a

certain statement, as multiple competing hypothesis can explain the phenomenon (Lilienfeld et

al., 2014). Previous paragraphs have offered some alternative explanations. Moreover, one

research finding cannot conclusively prove a specific statement. Rather, numerous evidence from

multiple systematic research studies conducted rigorously should be used to support a claim

(Lilienfeld et al., 2014). In fact, in the article, evidences were never mentioned, and the author

only dictated how one finding proves his theory.

ANALYZING THE CLAIMS OF SCENARIO C 4

References

Lilienfeld, S.O., Lynn, S.J., Namy, L.L., Woolf, N.J., Cramer, K.M. & Schmaltz, R. (2014).

Psychology: From inquiry to understanding. 2nd Canadian edition. Toronto, ON: Pearson.