Media Critique – Sex and Public Speaking Stress

Is it fake news? Is it mere entertainment? Media is known to sensationalize and misrepresent

scientific news stories to attract interactions through views, clicks, comments, and shares. News stories

often take advantage of stories that attract quick attention, such as emotionally charged topics like sex

or violence. The BBC article titled “Sex ‘cuts public speaking stress’” is an example of one such paper.

This news story represented the scientific article reasonably well but stretched the results farther than is

responsible. To inform the public honestly and effectively, news sources should be careful to present

scientific articles accurately and honestly. As in this case, they often do not. This article confused

correlation with causation and oversimplified results, and in doing so misled readers.

In the BBC Article “Sex ‘cuts public speaking stress’,” the author alluded to a causal link between

sex and public speaking more strongly than would appropriate given the correlational study. The article

stated that having sexual intercourse (but not other sexual experiences) causes lower stress when public

speaking. The research that the article drew from showed a correlation between the two, but did not

establish causation. The study compared self-reported sexual engagement with blood pressure data

prior to stressful events. The independent variable (what sort of sexual experiences subjects had) was

not controlled or manipulated; it was part of self-reported diary data. The internal validity of the study is

therefore uncertain, because a third variable potentially influenced the stress level or behavior of the

subjects. For example, people with more confidence and self-assurance may be more likely to be

sexually active and experience less stress under social pressure. Correlational studies are easier to

conduct and can inform prediction of variables but cannot establish causality. Controlled experiments

are more objective and verifiable, but often difficult to administer (Stangor, 2015). In this case, an

experimental design would be rather difficult, as manipulating someone’s sexual behavior comes with

practical and ethical concerns. Therefore, a correlational study may be best for this scenario but the

authors should be honest and transparent about the study.

 The BBC article somewhat simplified the study, merely reporting results and not discussing any

potential limitations with the study. The study’s author did state that the sample size was rather low,

and the study period was rather short. These factors should be taken into consideration when writing

news stories about scientific articles, but the meaning of the sample size and study period were not

described. The small sample size and short study period call into question the external validity of the

study. In other words, it’s not obvious that the article’s results are meaningful in making statements

about a wider population.

In misreporting this scientific article, the BBC did a disservice to their readers. Admittedly, the

original scientific study included some speculation on causal links for the observed correlation, which

may lead some to believe the article was written properly. The BBC writer merely reported the

speculation of the original author. Though writers of news articles should cover the discussion of the

scientific study, this article should have been careful to explain the correlational nature of the study

regardless. It is important not to overstate the validity and certainty of scientific studies because

everyday readers rely on media interpretations of scientific articles to be informed, rather than reading

and interpreting the original study for themselves. The layman reader is not well-equipped to

understand the nuances of the original scientific studies, and reading into a misinterpretation could be

harmful.

Authors need to be careful when reporting on scientific studies because they risk imparting a

false sense of certainty. Carefully considered and skeptical writing can go a long way to inform the

public, but irresponsible or sensational reporting has the potential to misinform. While the research

discussed may provide some support for the claim that there is a connection between sexual intercourse

and stress reduction, that is not the same thing as proving that sexual intercourse causes stress

reduction in public speaking. Other factors affecting public speaking stress should be studied and

experimental methods should be applied where possible to study causal effects.

Viktor Lillard
PSYCH 2367.01 – Jake Teeny
Revision Paper 1
1/16/19