Discussion

You must post before seeing replies. Edit history will be available to instructors.

Due Aug 27 60 points

View Split Screen

All

Search entries or author…

Newest First

 Back to Week at a Glance
(

SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE!

In the 19th century, the term “snake oil salesman” referred to a person who traveled from town
to town making extravagant claims about their cure-all elixirs. They used deceptive practices to
sell their product but would leave town before angry and disappointed customers could get their
money back.

In our modern life, we are still bombarded with claims about products/treatments that promise to
improve our lives. “Experts” may claim that a cream will make your skin look younger, a mattress

(
LgRendition/AdobeStock_286639141.jpeg)

will cure your back pain issues, changing your child’s diet will cure their attention deficit disorder
(ADD), or supplements with “proprietary” ingredients will cause you to lose weight.

But have you stopped to consider if there is scientific evidence to support these claims? Or might
some of these claims be made by the modern-day equivalent of a snake oil salesman? Are they
aiming to make money by selling a product they know to be ineffective or trying to increase
website revenue by driving up website traffic? For any claim you come across, you should
consider if scientific procedures have been utilized to validate the claim.

Skepticism and critical thinking are closely related concepts, often intertwined in the pursuit of
understanding and evaluating claims, beliefs, and evidence. As such, a skeptic is someone who
requires evidence to accept a claim. A skeptic would look for answers to questions such as:

“What evidence exists to support the claim?”
“How was this tested?”
“Who tested this and what credentials do they have?”
“What are the repercussions of purchasing or believing in a method that will not deliver
results?”

In this Discussion, you will practice being a skeptic by critically evaluating a media claim for a
product. Is the product the modern-day equivalent of snake oil? For this course and beyond, you
will learn the skills to be a critical consumer of information.

RESOURCES
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Cozby, P. C., & Bates, S. C. (2024). Methods in behavioral
research (15th ed.). McGraw Hill.

Chapter 1, “Scientific Understanding of Behavior”

Willingham, E. (2012, Nov. 8). 10 questions to distinguish real
from fake science
(
questions-to-distinguish-real-from-fake-science/?sh=445868c6146c)
. Forbes.

questions-to-distinguish-real-from-fake-science/?
sh=445868c6146c

Stemwedel, J. D. (2011, Oct. 4). Drawing the line between science
and pseudo-science (

Readings 

To prepare:

Review Chapter 1.
Consider what you learned in the Learning Activity, Becoming a Skilled Consumer of
Research.
Locate a claim in the media about a product that promises a cure or an improvement for
some aspect of psychological or physical health that you are skeptical about and that
could potentially be an example of pseudoscience.

Sources to search: advertisements on social media (e.g., Facebook, Instagram),
infomercials on the internet, advertisements in television commercials. (If the claim
you find is on TV, you can usually also find it on YouTube.)
Potential topics: homeopathic cures, cures for ADD/ADHD or autism, apps/games to
improve memory, anti-aging serums, etc.

Evaluate the claim by applying the textbook’s bulleted list of six indicators of
pseudoscience claims, which was also included in the Learning Activity.

Untestable/Unrefuted
Imprecise, Biased, or Vague
Anecdotal/Testimonial Evidence

good-science/drawing-the-line-between-science-and-pseudo-science/)
. Scientific American.
good-science/drawing-the-line-between-science-and-pseudo-
science/

Walden University, LLC. (2024). Becoming a skilled consumer of
research (
media.waldenu.edu/2dett4d/Walden/PSYC/3003/bs/index.html)
[Interactive media]. Walden University Canvas.

Meyer, R. C. (Director). (2019). A student’s guide to critical thinking
(

critical-thinking) [Video]. Alexander Street.

critical-thinking

Optional Media 

Questionable Expertise/Credentials
Confirmatory Evidence/Bias
Unverifiable Evidence

Assess the potential harmful psychological and/or physical effects or outcomes for
consumers of this product.

Post a response to the following.

In the first line of your post, state the claim you evaluated (e.g., Exercise app promises
weight loss in 30 days).

Provide a link (URL) to the claim you evaluated. If there is not a link, you may provide a
screenshot as an attachment to your post.
In one short paragraph, summarize the topic and claim that is made.
Explain at least two indicators of pseudoscience that made you skeptical of the claim.
Explain at least two potential harmful psychological or physical effects for consumers of
this claim.

Note: Your initial response should be supported with scholarly evidence from your research
and/or the Learning Resources and properly cited in APA format. You may state your opinion
and/or provide personal examples; however, you must also back up your assertions with
evidence, including in-text citation(s) and reference(s) in APA style. It is recommended that
you review the Grading Rubric with the criteria that will be used to evaluate your Discussion
prior to your submission.

Respond to the initial post of at least one colleague who picked a different topic than you.
Identify another potential indicator of pseudoscience present in the claim or an additional
harmful effect. Support your colleague reply with evidence from the assigned Learning
Resources. Provide a reference list for the resources you used.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before
you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by
clicking on the Reply button to complete your initial post. Remember, once you
click on Post Reply, you cannot delete or edit your own posts and you cannot
post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Post
Reply!

BY DAY 3

BY DAY 5

Reply