Abstract

For the fourth edition of the skeptical parent crossing, a study was conducted over the course of thirty days in an attempt to correlate the effects of critical thinking on parenthood. An international sampling of stakeholders were solicited to provide samples of cerebral output in the form of “blog” entries. All text submissions were analyzed using a multi-variable subjective rating system, and shared with a test audience composed of seventy-six Pygmy Marmoset (Callithrix (Cebuella) pygmaea). Due to the overwhelming nature of the primary source material presented in much of the subject matter, participants were found to become easily frustrated, tired and burdened by stress. This was anticipated, and ultimately affected our conclusions. Our methods and results are described below.

Materials

Opinions were gauged via online research and through an extensive request for submissions. Duplication of this study may require nothing more than connection to an internet service provider via a modern web browser and access to a population of adult (breeding-age) Pygmy Marmoset (hereafter referred to as C. pygmaea) of statistically significant size. Please refer to the methods section of this paper for further clarification of our data sources.

Methods

Please note: in the course of this study all individuals C. pygmaea were treated humanely and given opportunity to provide feedback — or opt out of further participation — at numerous checkpoints of the process. It was made clear at the beginning of this process that the nature of parenting information is often frustrating and bewildering. Fortunately numerous sources of critical analysis exist to examine this rash of otherwise unsupported claims and unsolicited advice.

1. Initial check-in and orientation of C. pygmaea. All participants were seated at identical computer workstations and supplied with an ample supply of fruit, leaves, insects and fresh water.

2. First round of exposure: Participants were asked to examine the nature of mass-media and critical thought from a total of four well-researched and submitted posts. Provided for feedback were meta-analyzes of parenting magazines submitted by Mother Wonder, comparative critique of topics across very different publications thoughtfully contributed by PodBlack Cat, an effective discussion of the consequences of holiday music hummed to the tune of AtheistDad, and one so-called bad parenting book report by none other than Wenchypoo.

3. Second check in: Some C. pygmaea began to show strain or distraction, but all participants remained in the study.

4. Second round of exposure: Participants were asked to explore the nature of consumer-level marketing and its effect on purchasing habits through the insightful analysis of three contributions. Provided for feedback were two buggy studies — an exploration of the pram through the eyes of domestic father but also a similar in-depth-analysis of stroller choice from Esther — and a collection of advice related to experiences dealing with home lighting technology smashed to the floor by otherwise Rational Moms.

5. Third check-in: All participating C. pygmaea continued to be optimistic about the content, but fatigue was apparent. One participant was disqualified for gouging holes in the desk with her specialized incisors while a second succumbed to extensive brain hemorrhaging and was removed, ultimately leaving the participant group at a count of seventy-four.

6. Final round of exposure: Participants were asked to look critically at the information presented under the heading “General Skeptical Parenting Advice” and other related topics by a final three skeptical carnival respondents. Provided for feedback was a detailed explanation of the uncritical causes of identity theft from kids via Carrie and Danielle, a skeptical examination of food allergies off the Babylicious blog, and finally from Ticktock some critical insight into home-based lotus births.

7. Multi-variable subjective rating system administered to participants on their experiences and perceptions.

8. Final check-in: the sixty-four surviving C. pygmaea were asked to complete a final short questionnaire related to their participation in the study then released back into the care of facility staff.

Results

Inconclusive.

Acknowledgements

1. Submissions for this study were gratefully collected (and continue to be solicited) through the Skeptical Parent Crossing Carnival site;
2. where — unfortunately — not all submitted articles were accepted for inclusion in this research. If you have something skeptical to share, please check with submission criteria and;
3. Submit your next round of posts to the above link where Mainstream Parenting Resources will conduct follow up research on your data.

REF: “A Study Examing the Correlation of Child-rearing and Critical Thought in the Self-Described Skeptical Parenting Community Among a Population of New World Monkeys” Journal of Skeptical Parenting. v.1, 2009.