The Times of India reported on a questionable study yesterday, touting the “clear effect” of hormone changes on women’s shopping-spree tendencies. I’m sorry, but any story that begins with, “men have long complained about their spouses splashing out on luxury items” is begging to be mocked.
The study’s lead researcher is quoted as saying, “Women may now decide they won’t go out clothes shopping when feeling pre-menstrual because it’s a time when they are more likely to overspend or buy on impulse.”
First things first. Yes, I am a woman, and yes, I write for a men’s magazine. Regardless of my gender, I have to question the integrity of a study based on a survey that, “asked the participants about their spending habits in the previous week and at the end of the survey asked for the date of their last menstrual period.”
Seriously?
I mean… that’s their data? Two unrelated questions with no real proof of correlation? The study may have been a preliminary one, but for a newspaper to tout such a dubious study as “fact” (especially one that furthers a stereotype that annoys women the world over)—well, I guess it happens all the time. But that doesn’t make it right.
Guys, I wouldn’t mention this one to your wives (or girlfriends) if you want to be on speaking terms for the rest of the day.
The Times of India is one of india’s most popular newspapers because they have made a deliberate choice to be commercial and do whatever it takes to sell. It is not surprising to see an article there that reinforces negative stereotypes – somewhere out there a guy is going to be gratified that a newspaper confirms what he already thought about women. And he is going to buy the paper tomorrow as well. It is better not to take them too seriously- I am not suggesting you stop reading them, I am a subscriber myself. there was a time some… Read more »
Should also be tagged as ‘huh?’
I believe this is what happened: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174
(Also, I think what you mean is “no proof of causation” as opposed to “no proof of correlation”–they certainly did find a correlation, which means that they aren’t at a dead end in this topic of research and that they have a study that suggests that they may want to study this further to determine whether one causes the other.)
but the context alone predicts bias. when you setup “general-pms-type-irrational-stuff-that-crazy-wimmingses-does” versus “did the wommings haves flows?” you’ve already got an answer, whether you like it or not. It also assumes that women have PMS across the board without testing for actual individual hormonal levels. Or for hormones that men have, too. It’s already bunk. My guess is that more likely if any real correlation is found, that it’s a depression-related hormone cocktail or a relative bump in testosterone. All of which might be explained estrogen *decreasing* (like you know, what causes periods anyway), which makes women more like *men* and… Read more »
What a waste of money! I could have told you that women love to shop without doing a study. I done not think it’s matter’s what time it is, waht day it’s is or what month it is they just shop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!