Science Literacy: Two Media Sources Critique (Psychology Essay)

Running head: SCIENCE LITERACY1
Science Literacy: Two Media Sources Critique
Student Name
College/University Affiliation
SCIENCE LITERACY

2

Science Literacy: Two Media Sources Critique
1. Part One: Media Source Including Research Study
1.a. In “Children brought up in greener areas have higher IQ and fewer behavioural problems, study suggests,” (direct link provided under “References” section below) Cockburn (n.d.) reports findings of a study about impact of green space on children's IQ.
1.b. The article, highlighting study findings clearly in headline, consistently emphasizes a positive effect on children's IQ scores as a result of residing close to a green space – regardless of socioeconomic background. The article, reporting study findings, showcases, more specifically, how green spaces – including, for example, parks, grassy areas, gardens and areas with trees – provide environmental benefits by reducing air and noise pollution both of which are “associated with significantly lower levels of symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress.” Conversely, children less exposed to green space are shown to exhibit lower IQ.
1.c. The findings reported in “Children brought up in greener areas have higher IQ and fewer behavioural problems, study suggests” are clearly making an associative claim. This is evident, in part, by an explicit statement made by study authors of an association between proximity to green space and higher IQ for children:
The authors said: “Higher residential green space is associated with lower ambient air pollution and noise exposure. Both have been associated with diminished cognitive development. Furthermore, from a health perspective, green space promotes physical activity and stress reduction [emphasis added]. (Cockburn)
Cockburn also uses “associated” explicitly to report study's main finding: “The scientists assessed more than 700 people aged between 8 and 15, and found a 3.3 per cent increase in
SCIENCE LITERACY

3

space within a 3km radius from the residential address was associated with a 2.6-point higher total IQ.” Moreover, Cockburn dutifully report study's findings and barely offer personal descriptions and/or causation between proximity to green space and higher IQ for children. Indeed, Cockburn does not even close his article by offering a personal statement or opinion. Instead, Cockburn concludes by quoting study's implications for policy makers: “These findings are relevant for policy makers and urban planners to create an optimal environment for children to develop their full potential.”
1.d. Given article's presentation of reported study's findings, study's population of interest are children between 8 and 15 years. For sampling purposes, researchers assessed over 700 children and found “a 3.3 per cent increase in space within a 3km radius from the residential address...associated with a 2.6-point higher total IQ.”
1.e. In “Children brought up in greener areas have higher IQ and fewer behavioural problems, study suggests,” study's central constructs of interest are proximity to green space and enhanced IQ. However, despite study's consistently in reporting a positive association between proximity to green space and children's enhanced IQ some manipulation (conscious or not) is noted about impact of different outcomes. Specifically, whilst study findings offer solid evidence (as shown in next section) about a positive association between proximity to green space and children's increased IQ, little, if at all, similarly solid evidence is provided about how green space is associated with, or perhaps correlated to, wider claims about children's enhanced physical activity, reduced stress, and more interestingly, about children's ability to “develop their full potential.” Put differently, study authors extend one confirmed finding to factors, or variables (e.g. physical activity and stress reduction), less rigorously examined, if at all, compared to
SCIENCE LITERACY

4

study's central claim about a positive association between proximity to green space and children's enhanced IQ.
1.f. The original study (link provide under “References” section below) reports findings, intuitively, in a more detailed manner. There are, however, a number of discrepancies between reported findings in article and study. For instance, whilst study gives a specific number of participants (620), article mistakenly reports number of participants as “more than 700 people.” The age cohor...