Bad news: Leaded fuel reduced the IQ of everyone born before 1990 by ~4.25%. Millennials are the first to be born with unleaded gas.
Worse news: a new paper shows environmental lead levels from leaded gasoline are still around in cities today, and cause continued neurotoxicity.
Incidentally, everyone should know the story of Thomas Midgley, who oversaw the invention & spread of both leaded gas AND chlorofluorocarbons. He had, as J. R. McNeill wrote “more impact on the atmosphere than any other single organism in earth’s history.” interestingengineering.com/thomas-midgley…
Well, I just learned from the comments that we inexplicably still allow leaded gas for small airplanes.
And the damages to kids from lead exposure among these most-travelled routes is in the billions of dollars a year, as outlined in this paper.
I also just learned that NASCAR was allowed to use leaded gas until 2007… and the effects on areas near race tracks was shockingly large. Look at the charts of elderly mortality rates & child blood levels before and after lead gasoline was banned at races.
Key set of findings about universities using 1.7M syllabi:
👨🔬Classes that teach more recent academic findings are linked with higher graduation rate & income
🧑🏫Researchers teach more recent findings
🎓Elite schools teach more recent stuff, students at less elite ones benefit more
My semi-regular reminder: being good at work means being good at meetings.
We spend 15% of work in meetings and managers spend 50%. Plus, post-COVID meetings are up 14%. So, spend a few minutes reviewing this research on the science of good meetings (1/): researchgate.net/publication/32…
To pull out some findings. Things to do before the meeting:
✅only meet if needed
👯♀️make sure to only invite people who need to be there.
🎯set clear goals & outcomes
📄have an agenda that all review in advance
⏰make it short & relevant to all invited 2/
During the meeting...
⏱arrive on time
📋follow the agenda
🙋♀️🙋♂️everyone participates
💻📱never multitask
⚔️intervene if mood turns negative
🤪humor helps performance
🙅♀️leave time for objections
🗳Let everyone help decision-making. If a decision is made, tell everyone 3/
The paradox of our Golden Age of science: more research is being published by more scientists than ever, but the result is actually slowing progress! With too much to read & absorb, papers in more crowded fields are citing new work less, and canonizing highly-cited articles more.
Based on 90M papers: “These findings suggest troubling implications…. If too many papers are published in short order, new ideas cannot be carefully considered against old, and processes of cumulative advantage cannot work to select valuable innovations.” doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2…
See also this 👇 thread on the burden of knowledge in science.
Conformity to wrong beliefs about norms can have big impacts. An example: 87% of Saudi men privately agreed that they supported women working, but 70% thought other men were less supportive. When the men learned the real support, 6 month employment among their wives went up 179%.
And if you want to get an incorrect sense of norms, there is no better place to come to the wrong conclusion about what most real people believe than Twitter! (Except maybe TikTok or Facebook)
A surprisingly large part of the value of Google & other search engines is just Wikipedia.
This paper shows that Wikipedia articles appear in 67%-84% of all search engine results pages & they are the source for most “knowledge boxes” or other excerpts. nickmvincent.com/static/wikiser…
Because Wikipedia is usually used as a starting point that others expand upon, I think most people don’t realize how influential it is & how much of our world is built on it. For example, it plays a surprisingly large role in guiding the direction of scientific research 👇
Real world behavior is also strongly influenced by Wikipedia articles: Adding two paragraphs of text & nice pictures to randomly selected articles about small European cities led to an over 9% increase in hotel stays; the edits are worth $190k per year! marit.hinnosaar.net/wikipediamatte…
Depressingly, a debunked theory is believed by the vast majority of teachers. The belief in Learning Styles (that some people are auditory learners, visual learners, etc) is not only wrong, it can hurt. But the research shows that when teachers learn why, they change. So, a 🧵1/
First off, there is just no evidence that teaching to a student's preferred "style" leads to any better teaching outcomes. And nobody really knows what a "learning style" is, over 71 different types have been proposed, but none help. But the belief persists for a reason... 2/
Students *think* they learn more when something matches their style... even though they objectively don’t and students don't even use their preferred styles. You may wonder, "So it doesn't work, what's the harm?"
Except we know that a belief in learning styles can hurt... 3/