A study at Northwestern University "evaluated 67 normal, mentally healthy, suburban males initially in 1962, when the boys were 14, and in 1997, when the men were 48."38 One interesting finding was that "44% of the men 'remembered' that when they were teenagers, they believed that it was OK to have sex during high school. However, only 15% of the participants felt this way when they were questioned as teenagers."
Four statistics students are asked to tell what this finding suggests, in terms of which of these study designs we should be skeptical of in general: retrospective observational studies, prospective observational studies, studies where the treatment is unethical, or experiments that are not double- blind. Which student gives the best response?
Adam: It shows you should be skeptical of experiments with a lack of realism. When you're in your forties, getting into the teenage mindset is too unrealistic.
Brittany: The difference in percentages is so big, I think the men must have been influenced by whoever was asking the questions. That's always a problem if a study isn't double-blind.
Carlos: This is a prospective observational study, carried forward in time from 1962 to 1997, so that's the type of study you should be skeptical of.
Dominique: The study itself is prospective, but the point is that people don't remember things from the past very accurately. So it teaches us to be skeptical of retrospective studies.