Leaning into the metaness of having this conversation on social media in social media and on the subject of it's shallowness, then detaching the headline takeaways from the study's detail as done here by GP is a useful case in point. Can a reasonable argument be made even against straw men ? Do the details matter when the sound byte talking head line is the lone subject of interest ?
Note to downvoters : no opinion is offered here, for or against.
Like it or not the memeification of a study like this compressed in to a couple of headlines which float off into the field of engagement on their own - that phenomenanon is a thing and would not happen if the bullet points didn't tap into a confirmation bias of pre existing wider interest in the topic being advanced in some small way through surfacing the conversation and I question if this holds true whatever the originating details might be. I certainly don't have a clear answer.
