Quick Investigation of a Claim
Investigate a surprising claim by checking who published it, then consulting a reference source and tracing what the cited evidence actually says. A legitimate publisher can still convey a misleading implication.
THE IDEA
Quick Investigation of a Claim
You hate flossing. You see this tweet, which implies you don’t have to—even the “Health Dept” says so. Before you toss the floss, there are a couple of steps to take. Hover over WINK News. Despite its cheesy name, you learn that it’s a legitimate TV station in southern Florida. On to Wikipedia’s article on dental floss.
You skip the introductory material and beeline to “Efficacy.” The first line reads: “The American Dental Association has stated that flossing in combination with tooth brushing can help prevent gum disease and halitosis.” Preventing disease and smelly breath seem like good reasons to keep flossing, no? As for the “Health Department”? There’s a whole subsection about it. True, the 2015 US Dietary Guidelines for Americans eliminated reference to flossing. But when the American Dental Association investigated why, it learned that the new guidelines focused only on diet and that “the omission was not because the Department questions the efficacy of flossing.” For now, continue to strangle your fingers to save your teeth.
!Figure 7.6 Tweet from @winknews proclaiming “little proof” that flossing works (https://twitter.com/winknews/status/760432456935825408)
!Figure 7.7 Wikipedia page for “Dental floss” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_floss, September 2021)
When to use it
When you see a health claim on social media
When you hear a statistic in a news report
When you want to verify a common belief
When you encounter a tweet from a legitimate-looking source
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Evaluating the claim that flossing is ineffective
A tweet from WINK News (a legitimate TV station) implied that even the Health Department says there's little proof flossing works. The quick investigation involved checking the source (WINK News is a real station) and then consulting Wikipedia's article on dental floss. Wikipedia noted that the American Dental Association supports flossing, and the omission from the 2015 US Dietary Guidelines was because of dietary focus, not questions of efficacy.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How can you quickly verify a surprising claim from a news source?
What are the steps to investigate a claim using Wikipedia?
Why is it important to check the source before believing a headline?
References
- Dental floss Wikipedia page — Wikipedia contributors (2021)
- 2015 US Dietary Guidelines for Americans — U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture (2015)
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Verified How to Think Straight, Get Duped Less, and Make Better Decisions about What to Believe Online (Mike Caulfield, Sam Wineburg)