Do your own research. But do it right.

Expand your scientific horizon with Brilliant! First 200 to use our link brilliant.org/sabine will get 20% off the annual premium subscription.
This video comes with a quiz that lets you check your knowledge: quizwithit.com/start_thequiz/...
A lot of scientists make jokes about people who do their own research. I want you to know, that it’s utterly okay to do your own research --- provided you do it right. But how do you do that? I have collected some tips that I hope you will find helpful.
💌 Support us on Donatebox ➜ donorbox.org/swtg
🤓 Transcripts and written news on Substack ➜ sciencewtg.substack.com/
👉 Transcript with links to references on Patreon ➜ / sabine
📩 Sign up for my weekly science newsletter. It's free! ➜ sabinehossenfelder.com/newsle...
👂 Now also on Spotify ➜ open.spotify.com/show/0MkNfXl...
🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜
/ @sabinehossenfelder
🖼️ On instagram ➜ / sciencewtg
00:00 Intro
00:39 Reasons for doing this video
03:35 When not to do your own research
04:27 Before You Start: Reasonable Expectations
05:27 Before You Start: Be Honest With Yourself
08:00 Before You Start: Acknowledge Biases
09:18 Start With the Basics
11:08 Understanding Scientific Literature
14:24 Don’t Do This
15:29 Statistics and other lies
16:02 Summary
16:40 Learn Science With Brilliant
#science #research #quizwithit

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Make your new knowledge stick by taking the quiz for this video: quizwithit.com/start_thequiz/1694147601200x685112821071558500

[@anne-kathrins2721]

Körper gesunden, Geist kontrollieren, Seele befreien. Es ist offensichtlich, dass Sie in jedweden Bereichen nicht entferntester sein könnten. 😊😊

[@charlesbradshaw3281]

As a computational scientist, I've published research in areas as different as high-energy astrophysics and computational chemistry. I've also made egregious blunders and had to withdraw papers with embarrassing mistakes. Admitting mistakes, in most of the community, is a sign of integrity. I wholly endorse your research methodology and enjoy your channel.

[@damian4106]

What kind of mistakes? What would you have done differently in your process to prevent these mistakes?

[@charlesbradshaw3281]

The biggest was to use a constant the produced a reasonable result, but was not correct. The constant was off by about an order of magnitude. @@damian4106

[@jeaniebird999]

I was born in a state of wonder and it has never left. Not surprising, I am full of questions and always have been. But, when I was 7, I met paedophile pop and he was the first person I had ever met that had an answer to EVERY single question I ever had! He had to have been the smartest person, on the planet! It wasn't until I met my husband that I learned paedophile pop was completely full of shit (and that he was a paedophile; I didn't even know what was happening wasn't ok, even though I hated it) and the "education" I thought I had gotten, from him, was one big lie! Needless to say, this seriously traumatized me but that's when I realized, "I don't know," is a perfectly reasonable answer to any question! Now, I am much more likely to trust the person that admits to a mistake, like you, than one that insists they're infallible.

[@ready1fire1aim1]

In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's Monad (first emanation of God), from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together with the Strong Nuclear Force: 1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the Strong Nuclear Force. 2) Interconnectedness: In the Monadology, monads are interconnected in a vast network. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together. 3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions. 4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the Strong Nuclear Force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter. 5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz. 6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics. 7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions. em·a·na·tion noun an abstract but perceptible thing that issues or originates from a source.

[@gasun1274]

​@@jeaniebird999oogoo gahgah hypocrypytomakeabunchofwordsbyputtinggreekandlatinwordstogetherology

[@paulcooper3611]

"And don't trust me, either." That is priceless. Thank you so much for posting this video. I'm going to keep your recommendations in mind when doing my own research.

[@RachelWilliams-um1en]

Hi, how are you doing 😊😊😊😊

[@2mains234]

Some of the most interesting research comes when ideas come together from disparate fields. If everybody had to just stick to what they were an expert in, we would be all the poorer for it. I am very glad Sabine, that you are helping give people the tools to learn for themselves.

[@surferdude4487]

It is a fact that most of the important break-throughs have come from multi-disciplinary colaborations. Sticking to what you know stifles progress.

[@kittehboiDJ]

Specialization doesn't do us any favors.

[@bobsterclause342]

Physasist phiz uh sist an orgamsim who solves a problem you didn't know you had in a way you didn't understand

[@surferdude4487]

There are people that just want to silence any opinion that they do not share. The scientific method is not restricted to a single discipline. Your videos are informative, unbiased and entertaining. What more could I aske? Keep right on being you and I will keep on watching.

[@anna9072]

“Not just to annoy people…though that’s definitely a bonus…” 🤣🤣🤣 thanks, Sabine, keep on annoying people. I’m here for it.

[@flagmichael]

If we ain't annoyed, our brains are just lounging. I work assiduously to avoid being annoyed, and to find words like assiduously. assiduously assiduously assiduously....

[@Thomas-gk42]

Yea, and one week later, the xao. Vid was uploaded, yea then the people were annoyed

[@cloogshicer]

YES! Please do the video on how to recognize an expert in a field you yourself know nothing about.

[@SPDLand]

The trick is to find two and with opposite points of view. If they start arguing in stead of one laughing at the other, they are both experts and you pick the one whose opinion you like most.

[@rozkek6697]

​@@SPDLand You don't 'pick' the one whose opinion you like the most, that's irrational. You let both try to convince you of what's true, and the one that's more reasonable and backs up their claims should convince you, whether you like the conclusion or not. And if one clearly doesn't respond to counter-arguments, uses strawmans, moves goal posts, etc... that's a good sign that expert isn't correct. However, there's nuance and complexity in being able to tell when an expert is correct or not. The measure to take here as a person is to stay informed enough about a certain topic so that you can tell when something is fishy. Because if you have zero knowledge about a field, it's very easy to be fooled. E.g. I believe that quantum mechanics (an unintuitive subject) is a thing, but I have so little understanding of the field that an expert *could*, if they wanted to, make up some completely false claims and convince me to believe in them. But an expert can't convince me that a generation of giraffes can evolve wings in one year because I know enough about evolution, despite not being an expert, to understand that's unrealistic.

[@Hendrik_F]

Also, that they're arguing instead of laughing at another doesn't mean that they are experts. That's certainly a good thing, but there are lots of people arguing that aren't experts. @@SPDLand

[@brothermine2292]

Doesn't it suffice that they have their own Wikipedia page?

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Noted!

[@siimkinnas]

This should be a mandatory intro to each and any PhD study. Short and concise, excellent work!

[@bobsterclause342]

Physasist phiz uh sist an orgamsim who solves a problem you didn't know you had in a way you didn't understand

[@JorgeMunozJr]

It took me basically my graduate career to figure out what you say here in 20 minutes. Thank you for teaching us how to apply the rigor and methods of science to everyday life. Please do the video on experts.

[@RachelWilliams-um1en]

Hi, how are you doing 😊😊😊

[@earthing42]

Sabine's ability to inject humor into any topic is truly impressive. Her sense of humor shines through consistently, and absolutely adore it.

[@siriosstar4789]

Humor ?? now that's funny !

[@kyoteecasey]

​@@siriosstar4789maybe a bit subtle for some...

[@thewheelieguy]

cue accented speech: Ze Germans do not have any sense of humor ve are avare of...

[@user-li7ec3fg6h]

​@@thewheelieguy "No mention the war!" 😊 All the best to you from the country, where nobody has something to laugh about. 😊

[@georgenemtzov]

...and she is German!!! :)))

[@ez9566]

The most important thing is honesty. Some people only want information that proves their point right,others just seek randomly. Its difficult to research because it takes time and innitiative. Everyone has these phases but sometimes you mistake things for your own ideas and thats where you have to be honest to yourself

[@cam4007]

We are all subjective beings, often only minimally or superficially aware of our own biases. Confirmation bias is a widespread problem with accumulating and processing available information. Additionally we tend to become defensive and reject others’ claims of this bias.

[@billynomates920]

it means you are a thief-in-the-night. 😉 @@richard_d_bird

[@fushumang1716]

This is true with OoL research

[@DeclanMBrennan]

Coupled to that, I'd add *Humility* Be well grounded in science but always leave room for a tiny bi t of doubt even when you are most convinced.

[@CookiesRiot]

It's so easy with the Internet to research specifically to find support for a belief you already hold. One of the keys to understanding your own bias is to search for the exact opposite of what you expect as an answer. And it's even harder to filter for good sources. Especially because of social engineering - proponents of fringe ideas will often program their audience by repeating keywords which exclusively give search results from their side. If you search for "genetic entropy" basically all of the results are from young-earth creationist websites written by laymen with a specific agenda and absolutely no idea what entropy even means.

[@vixlenz4104]

Thank you for being so open and honest Sabine. If people were forced to stop talking if they made any kind of error the whole world would be silent. Please keep making more video, they're incredibly interesting and helpful and unfortunately, not all of us can afford a PHD, and still want to try to educate ourselves. Much love!!💕💕💕

[@judkilgore3822]

The only benefit to that would be less noise, in particular the noise of people loudly doubling down on a mistake to spare themselves embarrassment or the loss of followers or sponsors.

[@bobsterclause342]

Physasist phiz uh sist an orgamsim who solves a problem you didn't know you had in a way you didn't understand

[@treidchimney]

YAWNnnnnnnnn stop paraphrasing the omega man @@bobsterclause342

[@frasercain]

I really trust my instinct when I don't feel like I have a good understanding of a topic. That means I should report on it until I understand it deeper. Often this means I schedule an interview with someone who specializes in it so I can get a better explanation into my head. Most of my interviews come from this instinct. 🙂

[@ty2010]

Also, the wonderful world of rabbit holes beckons

[@user-li7ec3fg6h]

Fraiser Cain😊! I look your content since years and learned a lot! Thank you very much! You, Dr. Hossenfelder and Anton Petrov are very good in science comunication. And I am realy happy to know that are persons where we get good informations and views. Thats realy great!

[@ThePowerLover]

"But that instinct is not peer reviewed!"

[@bobsterclause342]

Physasist phiz uh sist an orgamsim who solves a problem you didn't know you had in a way you didn't understand

[@ArtisanTony]

I want an objective person to speak on subjects. This is more important to me than a PhD and I think you do a great job :)

[@henrythegreatamerican8136]

I think all the nutty right wing voters who support Donald Trump need to watch this video and stop using FOX NEWS as their major tool for political research!!!!

[@nomizomichani]

I don't know if a person can be objective as an observation is never objective. However a logical person might be helpful, but the question is can I recognize the logic?

[@Liz11679]

​@henrythegreatamerican8136 you seem just as ignorant as the 'trump supporters' you accuse of 'watching fox news' as their source!..really? how shallow can you be?.. 🙄🙄

[@JTheoryScience]

yes!

[@agapitoliria]

Having high education in something has had an unusual benefit for me in regards to choosing who I listen to. it's basically how I judge channels. From time to time you'll hear the person you follow talk about the topic you know about and if you catch them saying very uninformed things... well now you know the rest of what they tell may very well be as well.

[@MCsCreations]

Sabine, I love to do "my own research", for decades already... Since I started to access the internet and learned to do it. And I absolutely agree, you NEED a very healthy dose of skepticism, including about yourself and your biases. I remember when a friend of mine asked me to start writing articles for his astronomy blog. So I chose some topics and started searching about them... And then I had an transformative experience: I had to write something I was biased against. And let me tell you... It felt bad! It's never easy to go against your own biases, but reality doesn't care for your feelings. It is what it is. So I went with what the evidence was telling me and wrote it. And published the article. And, honestly? After that it felt great. I felt fantastic for being honest, so that's what I kept doing. (His blog unfortunately didn't live long enough, but then I created my own and published everything there. The idea was to create a non profit organization to keep it going, but it didn't work out... But the blog lived for more than 10 years, which is a big victory.) Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊

[@MCsCreations]

@@pliktl Absolutely!

[@johnsmith1474]

This is Jr High level prose, and you use "I" eleven times. The cherry on your childishness sundae is the two emoticons at the end.

[@MCsCreations]

@@johnsmith1474 Dude, I'm not even from the US. Say whatever you want, I just don't care.

[@sethtenrec]

@@johnsmith1474 well said

[@HxTurtle]

​@@johnsmith1474I'm sorry you don't have a life so all you can do is tell others theirs isn't worth much either so you feel better about your own failure. heads up, dude.

[@terryjwood]

Like my doctor said, when I suspected I might have celiac disease, "Don't confuse your 15 minutes of Google searching with my 15 years of practicing medicine." I told him, "Don't confuse your 15 minute lecture on my disease in med school with my 15 years of living with it!"

[@kuyab9122]

So did he not diagnose you with celiac?

[@terryjwood]

@@kuyab9122 He SCREAMED at me, "That's IMPOSSIBLE!" He really believed that celiac disease only happened to children in the 3rd world. Perhaps he slept though the lecture.

[@kuyab9122]

@@terryjwood Oh. What was his diagnosis to you?

[@terryjwood]

@@kuyab9122 He diagnosed that I was "obsessed" and was imagining my illness. He wanted me to take 6 months of Valium to cure my obsession. I fired him on the spot. I would have become addicted to Valium and still would have been sick. Instead, I went gluten free on my own and within 3 days I was feeling better. My brain fog lifted. By a month I was my old self again. So I saw an allergist at the University of Pittsburgh who looked at my medical records and told me I was "gluten intolerant" and that I'd need the gluten free diet for life. He also told me to get a new PCP. I had the genetic test for celiac disease and it came back positive. My new PCP and I talked about what to do. She discouraged me from doing a gluten challenge because it would just make me sick. What difference would it make to be coded as a celiac? She coded me as having NCGS and we left it at that.

[@eric2500]

To do you own research, it has to be an honest question or questions. *You can't have the conclusion in mind already, and that's what's being made fun of.*

[@ianbrown1474]

Sabine, whilst I enjoy all your videos I think this is probably the most USEFUL video that I have seen in combatting nonsense on the Web. Good research practice is absolutely vital starting with checking sources. I’d love to see some more episodes on areas like, P-values, statistical significance, visualisations and what claims you can reasonably make from your data etc to remind me of all the stuff I’ve forgotten since doing my own PhD. Keep it up - you are brilliant (pun intended) !!

[@DiThi]

Too bad she doesn't apply her own advice on some videos where she obviously have a bias, by cherry picking studies (hopefully not on purpose).

[@rivimey]

@@DiThi "obviously have a bias" : it is IMO more likely that it is you who has a bias or that your bias and Sabines' are different. I notice this in myself as well. If I'm listening to some news item that conflicts with my own biases, the conflicts stand out like flourescent paint. Other points made in the same piece just flow on by even when they're wrong. I think it is probably impossible for a human to actually be unbiassed, but what we can all do is to be aware of our own biases and make sure that we account for them in our interactions with others.

[@DiThi]

@@rivimey I did reply to this comment and my reply disappeared. I was being respectful and providing evidence. I hope it's YT being weird, otherwise it means she does not want people to know.

[@daran0815]

@@DiThi Would Sabine (or any other channel owner) dunk you, your other posts would also be gone. You would still see your posts, but no one else would. So I think it is reasonably safe to assume that it wasn't Sabine. Either way, the majority of folks blaming Sabine for having bias seem to be strongly and rather obviously biased, but apparently believe they are not. Often this simply means they choose to believe some conflicting source and consider everything contrary to be biased. Which is a bit stupid, considering...

[@DiThi]

@@daran0815 She could delete individual posts that mention certain video response, but it could easily be a YT thing. We all are biased, but some people give more sources than others, and there are glaring omissions from Sabine, very well explained by the response I mentioned.

[@sapelesteve]

Excellent video Sabine! Let's not forget that any subject of research is a continual learning process. Even having a PhD in a given field does not mean that one knows everything there is to know. You are correct about doing your own research & also admitting what you don't know. Well done! 👍👍

[@CAThompson]

Also, a video explaining how to evaluate experts and their information would be fantastic.

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Thanks for the feedback!

[@DrDeuteron]

It’s pretty easy: if they want your money or control your choices, don’t trust them.

[@CAThompson]

@@DrDeuteron That's not so easy to work out all the time and people let themselves be misled. How would I know if the woman who is almost a stranger that's been running this here channel decides to lead me astray after a couple of years of being fair dinkum, but she still seems legit? People need money to do things and these days we don't have to give much money to each person but many are asking. I'm giving money to some people and groups because I trust them.

[@jayeff6712]

@@DrDeuteron Sometimes it is easy, but sometimes people just claim that an expert is doing something for personal gain. Then you have to check if there is anything to that claim or if those people benefit themselves from questioning the integrity of that expert.

[@-Freeman7]

I'm extremely thankful for your videos. You provide a wonderful introduction to several topics in a rigorous manner, and without disrespecting your audience by hiding the key points of scientific research and sounding cheesy like so many other science creators. Best regards from a fellow physicist.

[@uku4171]

Sounds cheesy all the time imo.

[@josephvanname3377]

I don't care if you are a scientist. Universities are unprofessional anyways.

[@Thomas-gk42]

Yes, and one week later, the cap. Vid. was uploaded 😢

[@Brioshie]

Please keep making videos on any subject you deem interesting. We're not here just for physics, we're here for Sabine

[@marcalvarez4890]

Im a simple man....I see Sabine....I click.

[@coreymorris1693]

Yea she's pretty good as a hole.. she's truly intelligent and she keep up to date in there subjects... I'm tires of all the old news from other people. No one expects her to know everything we come to her because she'll correct it if she's proven wrong. That says all I need to know lol

[@iiwi758]

@@coreymorris1693 I understand what you mean, but I want to let you know that "she's pretty good as a hole" contains a very unfortunate typo.

[@somacoma2219]

@@iiwi758 they must have meant blackhole. She is a fizz-ah-sist.

[@LettersAndNumbers300]

Not me, just physics please, thanks

[@chonpincher]

Thank you, Sabine. This is one of your best. All the ideas presented flow coherently from one aim: wanting to know the truth and giving this priority over other concerns. These other concerns include many things, such as wanting to feel comfortable about one's beliefs, avoid tedious checking, keep one's job, be popular, etc.

[@GvIn2it]

You keep debunking, challenging, and exposing the b.s. I will keep watching even if I see a mistake, because I know you have the integrity to correct your mistakes. Thank you.

[@adrianstephens56]

Thank you, Sabine. I have a Ph.D. in Physics. Then I dropped Physics and went into software and then communications technologies. Did I waste my time doing the Ph.D. ? Not at all. Although I've rarely used the specific knowledge gained, I've used the techniques learned for how to do research frequently throughout the next 40 years. It's about learning how to learn. I don't know if this is a possible video idea, but I've observed in myself that taking risks in accepting jobs or job roles is a great way to grow. i.e., how did you get there from where you started, when if I'd asked you when you started could you do what you're doing now, you'd have said "no way", or some such.

[@user-li7ec3fg6h]

Well explained!

[@edwardlulofs444]

Yes, I have a similar story.

[@caryoutismusic4515]

“I’m an organism who solves a problem you didn’t know you had in a way you don’t understand. “ And that’s why we love you

[@studentjohn]

"Look at the data, don't trust the text". Getting that advice early on would've saved me a lot of time when I was doing my PhD!. I think there is a deep disconnect between scientific integrity (where acknowledging and trying to counter your own bias's, admitting 'I was wrong', or 'I don't know' is a sign of integrity and a useful step) and politics and management (where admitting 'I was wrong' or 'I don't know' seems to be an admission of fatal flaws and, if anything, it is standard practice to encourage and use bias in yourself and others).

[@jsmog]

As a librarian for 33 years, I love helping curious people do their own research! The Internet is wonderful (I witnessed the open source science explosion with amazement), but also how misinformation was monetized...so thanks for showing Beall's List of predatory publishers! The proliferation of fake peer-reviewed journals (and the fake conferences on cruise ships or in exotic resorts) is a rabbit hole worth diving...

[@RachelWilliams-um1en]

Hi, how are you doing 😊😊😊

[@SpiritmanProductions]

I believe the key difference between the scientific community and people who "do their own research" is that the latter only look for evidence to _support_ their hypothesis, whereas the former make every attempt to _disprove_ it, to see if it stands up.

[@gcl2783]

How to recognize an expert would be a fantastic video.

[@dinoscheidt]

Media Competency is one of the key skills that no school teaches. Good video

[@CAThompson]

I learnt it in high school English. We were taught how to categorise and evaluate sources' veracity. It was part of the education curriculum. This doesn't seem to have stuck for a lot of people.

[@hans3331000]

In Ontario, we have to pass a literacy test before graduating high school so the ministry can verify that you are literate and these tests include excerpts of news articles that are controversial and you have to use your critical thinking to answer essay questions to show that you understand the complexity and nuances and will continue to do use these skills in the future. It generally works because our media here is generally unbiased and younger people are not the issue when it comes to misinformation. It's usually the older folks who never went through this that also vote that are ruining our country.

[@BassGoThump]

I was taught in school. We also did “opposing view points” where we had to source articles that disagreed with each other and show what was fact and what was opinion.

[@DrDeuteron]

⁠@@hans3331000Canadian media is unbiased 😂😂 😂. Maybe reread your post with some more, uh, competency. I suppose the ministry of truth wouldn’t like that.

[@johnbaldwin2948]

@@CAThompson You certainly "learnt" little in your English class.

[@Retro_Rich]

Sabine quite clearly has the analytical nous, transferable skills, research experience and towering intellect to prepare and present videos on topics other than Physics. End of. She rocks!!!

[@Drew-fb2gr]

Please make a video on how to identify experts! How research is conducted and performed is one of my main topics of study in school, and this is a wonderful video!

[@ScramJett]

I really liked your point about mistakes, such as the one in the greenhouse effect video. I agree that, if it's a small mistake that doesn't take away from the validity of the video itself, that doesn't mean the entire video is worthless. Too often, you see commenters on KZbin or social media who will say something like "you made a mistake so your entire video (or post) is worthless" or something along those lines. It's really irritating but I figure those people just don't like what they're hearing/reading and are looking for any excuse to make it look bad.

[@attosharc]

My issue is with people who do a little research (good) and suddenly become experts (not good) and argue with real experts (even worse), and this is becoming more common (catastrophic). People who use words in brackets (randomly) is annoying too and should be outlawed (get over it). Love your videos (good).

[@sumofalln00bs10]

Arrest me officer (for I am guilty) In my defence (I'm allowed to defend myself, right?) I think it's a sign of intelligence (of course I'd say that). My mind is parallel (so many thoughts) and my thoughts need expressing (which to pick? They all interlink!)

[@MachiningandMicrowaves]

Nested brackets, multiple levels deep, are my favourite. I resisted the urge to use any in this comment for reasons of public decency.

[@misterlyle.]

I thought brackets were the squared off things.

[@MachiningandMicrowaves]

@@misterlyle. heh heh, parentheses ftw

[@bensalemi7783]

@@misterlyle.(brackets)😂

[@pibob7880]

I like Sabine’s work because she brings grounded common sense. Simple as that.

[@fabkury]

I wish we had a handful of Sabines "servicing" every major spoken language.

[@v2ike6udik]

she also is a globalist influencer slave who constantly lies, how they, globalists, are killing us (sabine, you weak sht, chemtrails are not contrails)

[@flagmichael]

I think her broad perspectives carry the day. People who focus on One Thing rarely get many things right. That includes the One Thing, because it invariably depends on external assumptions.

[@v2ike6udik]

@@flagmichael but she does nopt stop lieng. globalist influencer tool.

[@vladimirseven777]

And I want your like.

[@RaphaelBraun]

After watching this video for the second time I now think that this is among the best/important videos on KZbin. I wish KZbin would show this video to more people.

[@jimgraham6722]

Thanks Sabine. Everyone should aspire to being a polymath. The world would be a better place if they did. Some are more successful at this than others. In areas outside specialised expertise, the issue is filtering the gems from the bullshit. At the end of the day though it is not that hard.

[@bobsterclause342]

Physasist phiz uh sist an orgamsim who solves a problem you didn't know you had in a way you didn't understand

[@chrismitchell9687]

Sabine, this video exemplifies a number of the reasons that I value the communications work that you do, and why I recommend people to your channel whenever I have an opportunity. Thank you!

[@johnsmith1474]

Three uses of "I" in an opening sentence ... sad stuff.

[@ralphmacchiato3761]

​@@johnsmith1474a jelly person appears!

[@Darkanight]

Of course we love to hear your expert opinion on topics in your area of expertise, but, also, it’s always nice to hear your takes on different subjects because you always do it on a well thought out and reasonable manner. I love your scientific work and I wish that you hadn’t separated the music from it as well, to be honest. It’s very refreshing to have different subjects going on and not sticking to the same thing only. You’re 100% right.

[@chrissidoku4779]

Sabines' tldr: "You are 100% right." 😁😉

[@photobyTaps]

Thank you. I'm 60 years old and a c+ high school grad. I really enjoy your videos because it actually reaches my brain with useful and entertaining facts. I really enjoy your content

[@MrVendorX]

2:49 these are exactly the points I like your channel for... Keep up the good work.

[@calvingrondahl1011]

Being wrong is OK if a person is honestly wrong and admits it. ❤️🖖

[@flagmichael]

I think it is crucial. If we are never wrong we have never explored our limits.

[@dewiz9596]

I once thought I was wrong but I was mistaken. . . 😉

[@timhaldane7588]

We all need a lot more of this attitude in life, I think. None of us is without error. No person ever ran without stumbling as they learned to walk.

[@RogerSullivanNOLA]

Excellent video. I think a big problem with self-research is that a lot of people (especially here in the U.S.) don't have enough foundational education and gathered knowledge to make it work properly and distinguish experts from cranks or evidence from a hole in the ground.

[@boooshes]

This is certainly true, it is even true that peer reviewed journals often have difficulty distinguishing the same thing. Just look at the data on (post review) retracted papers.

[@gogogirl2100]

I love looking at and into topics I am not directly involved in, I genuinely love "doing my own research" and learning 😁

[@christianbergmann8114]

That's the big problem. Back in these COVID starting days suddenly people who never did any kind of research did that for the first time and without any kind of knowledge how to start. With social media, namely Telegram, people got a lot of weird ideas from weird people and thought that's already research. Good research means as well to admit everything, that you don't know or can't know for sure. And I think that's probably the hardest hurdle to take.

[@Thomas-gk42]

Problem here on YT is, that many of the pseudoscientific channels on complicated topics, let's say astrophysics for example, are arranged so smart, that newcomers in the field can't tell them from valid channels like Sabine's, up and atom or pbs spacetime. Unfortunately, many people have their brains just on 'stand by', while "doing their own research".

[@devonshaw8935]

Yes, please do a video on how to recognize genuine experts. Please keep "doing your own research" and giving us great content. I have come to greatly enjoy the time that I spend watching your channel.

[@valtssondors7259]

Up you go! I too want to see the video on how to pick experts! I remember the start of the Covid pandemic - seemed like you could find an expert for every (Covid related) opinion, and this too was a large part of the reason why people were so confused back then.

[@sylvesterfalkeriksen8746]

The best Way to wake up in the morning is a video from you!

[@arcana261]

I'd say the best way to chill Saturday morning!

[@Gallahaut]

Was perfect for my morning commute

[@vincenttitanji2072]

It takes courage to admit that you once were wrong. That admission and correcting the error is the way to make progress in science.. Thanks for this reminder in your usual brilliant manner.

[@Thomas-gk42]

Perhaps she should admit it about the cap. Video too? It was uploaded just one week later

[@blackivy011]

Whoever is saying you should stay in your lane is full of crap. You are one of the only channels I’ve seen that hold a truly non bias science based view on your content.

[@BennyKleykens]

A scientific mind develops an intuition about what's right and wrong. It is a skill in itself. Being able to acknowledge/admit that you've been wrong is a show of amazing inner-strength. Great stuff, Sabine. You're my favorite science-communicator and you wouldn't have been around this long if you were only allowed to talk about subjects you have a PHD in 😂

[@Dragrath1]

Yep and it should be noted that because different fields are in general related some of that knowledge can transfer from one field to another so long as you have been careful about the jargon terminology of each field and the initial axioms and assumptions that may be employed in theories for each area of study you want to compare. Cross disciplinary work is as invaluable as it is difficult given that in order to get a PhD you need to specialize which can tend to lead to one narrowing in too much on their area of study to lose the forest through the trees.

[@ffffffffffffffff5840]

​@@Dragrath1I'm currently studying human affairs as a cross discipline between philosophy, politics, and sociology

[@GH-li3wj]

In other hand, if you admit too quickly to be wrong, this just means that you are not very sensitive to the Truth... To be wrong must be very very embarrasing to you otherwise lying is just a peace of cake.

[@kayakMike1000]

How do you feel about anthropogenic CO2 as the main driver of global warming?

[@Dragrath1]

​@@kayakMike1000 I'm not the guy I think you are asking but as a scientist who has an atmospheric science background the change in isotopic ratios of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere corresponding with the measured increase is a clear unequivocal smoking gun since the amount of carbon 14 has not increased since above ground nuclear testing stopped while carbon 12 has skyrocketed far faster than carbon 13. The preference for carbon 12 over carbon 13 indicates clearly that the total increase in carbon dioxide is predominantly biologically derived since only life selectively uptakes carbon 12 over carbon 13 and combined with the absence of even a proportional increase and in fact actually a measured decline proportionally speaking for carbon 14 means that the added carbon must have been out of circulation for millions of years. These combination of facts mean that fossil fuels are the only possible source for the measured increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide. There is literally no valid evidence based grounds for skepticism of the facts to deny that global warming is anthropogenically caused since no amount of volcanoes can not reproduce this isotopic carbon footprint. Even if you were trying to argue that the warming was caused by somthing other than the greenhouse effect we know with a certainty that the greenhouse effect must be responsible for the measured surface warming since it is the only phenomenon which predicts that the upper atmosphere has experienced a corresponding dramatic cooling we observe. Moreover only the trapping of heat can explain the measured energy deficit between what the Earth receives from the Sun and what the Earth radiates back into space an effect which we have measured grow stronger as carbon dioxide levels increase. Additionally the number of actively erupting volcanoes on Earth since we have had global monitoring has hovered steadily around 50 +/-10 at most while solar activity has been declining since the late 20th century. The empirical evidence for this is among the most robust and consistent examples in all of science and only the most extreme levels of cherry picking can be used to construct an argument for anything else. This evidence also notably corresponds with the timing where fossil fuel companies stopped denying global warming and started redirecting blame to consumers, which as the Covid shut down showed when consumer based emissions sources plummeted while overall greenhouse emissions from the fossil fuel industry and the adjacent industries continued to skyrocket alongside their record profits, clearly was a false flag blame deflection.

[@joshuaharper372]

As an academic trained in humanities but with broad interests, thank you for this clear and helpful video. Honesty and integrity are indispensable for useful research and progress in finding truth.

[@RobespierreThePoof]

My worry is that KZbin as algorithms are sending all of us academics to Sabine's channel when clearly she's trying to create videos for an audience who has not learned research, higher critical thinking and information literacy skills. I mean ...I enjoyed this video, but in the way that I enjoyed watching a colleague teach a class while sitting in. She deserves more.

[@Term-0]

​@@RobespierreThePoofEh, I'm no expert in most of this stuff, at best I'm a hobbyist, and I found and love her content, so it is getting around to non experts at least somewhat

[@Dan-DJCc]

Sabine, you demonstrate respect for the integrity of your audience and that is a great way to approach every topic being researched.

[@user-ky5dy5hl4d]

Not exactly. Link: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l5-Ze5x4gbakjrs

[@bobsterclause342]

Physasist phiz uh sist an orgamsim who solves a problem you didn't know you had in a way you didn't understand

[@Thomas-gk42]

​@@bobsterclause342she already was wearing that shirt in a music video eight years ago

[@galtgallery6720]

Thank you! Empowering. Helps me approach unknown topics, and address my insecurities.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

I've researched on doing my own research and discovered that my research is always right!

[@DJWESG1]

If you are already right, can't hurt to confirm your own bias 😅

[@brothermine2292]

Great! We can start citing youtube commenters in our own research!

[@someguycalledcerberus9805]

Legit problem, since you cannot prove a negative, you can never prove you are not wrong, but at which point do you declare that you have all the information, you understand it all and still, objectively, come to the conclusion that you're original bias was correct in the end?

[@johnatyoutube]

Thank you Sabine! I'm a scientist and appreciate your hard work at describing science and making it approachable. You described essential knowledge and processes for wading through the vast amount of information (and misinformation) out floating around the internet and how to distinguish hypotheses from research backed by true science and peer review. Scientific rigor and discernment are essential in this new age of information bombardment. Bravo! Keep it coming!

[@azmard4865]

I still have a long way and room for improvement to scratch the surface >

[@chicagofineart9546]

This should be the first video of every high school student as they begin their science study. Get them on the right track from the start.

[@nobodyimportant7804]

The problem is that so few people know what a reliable source is and anyone who fits their biases is believed without question. That got a lot of people hurt and killed during covid. A video on how to spot real experts is greatly needed.

[@schmetterling4477]

A reliable source agrees with reality. This means that you have to be willing to engage with reality in addition to sources. Experts are easy to spot: they are the people who won't talk to you because they don't want to waste their time on a non-expert who won't understand anyway. ;-)

[@misterlyle.]

This is a wonderful video, Sabine! It would make an effective component of a lesson in high school or junior college. If you ever feel inspired to produce a version of this for an elementary school audience, I would be sure to include it for my young students!

[@oryx_85]

My son is in High school and atleast in our area they are covering media and science literacy. How to source and cite it accurately. The community college I am attending for nursing school also has a required course as a part of English composition 1 that covers how to cite and research all types of topics. The library also provides access to different scientific and medical journals not avalible to the general public for free.

[@misterlyle.]

@@oryx_85 Thanks for your reply! The Internet has truly transformed the task of researching and writing reports for school assignments. It has also transformed the teacher's ability to evaluate each student's work. I use Google Classroom for my classes; it has significantly enhanced the speed and efficiency of our efforts.

[@rogerstone3068]

If you have not yet found Kurzgesagt, you might like to look at it for a very sound scientific approach communicating complex ideas.

[@misterlyle.]

@@rogerstone3068 Thanks for that reference! Their channel trailer is humorously made, with a tone that reminds me of the "Hitchhiker's Guide" movie. I will explore more there.

[@connecticutaggie]

One problem during the pandemic was that the lead expert (Anthony S. Fauci) was also a politician and politicians are quite comfortable bending/spinning the truth to reach their goal (they lie). This made things VERY confusing and frustrating. The first case for this for me was when Fauci early on advised that people not wear masks. I know this was because he was concerned about a shortage but he really did not make that clear and even alluded that they would not be helpful - that was an out right lie and made it clear to me that he was not someone I could trust and I needed to do my own research. Isn't that the hallmark of an expert - you can trust what they say. I have seen this before that often after experts move into organizational leadership, they loose there expert status and become more of a reference/summarizer.

[@IroAppe]

Oh yes. Sabine, please make this into a series (preferentially with its own playlist), where you teach people how to do good research as a layman. That could change things up and insert more reason and firsthand data into casual conversations, exactly what we need. I want to remind you about the 2 topics you mentioned in the video: 1) How to identify an expert, 2) Introduction into statistics necessary for layman's research (p-values, r-coefficients).

[@Thomas-gk42]

Thank you, honest and trustworthy

[@Mir-gw6kj]

There's something to be said for someone who is trained as a scientist having more developed skills for researching and critical thinking that can be applied more broadly. My PhD is in a very narrow area of neuroscience, but I have applied these skills to climate change, nutrition and a handful of other "hot take" topics, trying to constantly be aware of my own bias. Being aware of what I don't know is something I try to embrace, and this video really helped drive that home :)

[@user-dr2mk2qn5j]

Thank you for yet another great presentation. What solid guidelines / advice you've offered for researching a topic. You asked for input. I would add one more step -- document your work! I used to expend considerable effort to identify the best answer when it was not obvious among competing claims, then once I was satisfied I would move on to other things. However, it slowly dawned on me that I had not kept track of my sources and findings, so I was not able to properly defend my position or share the strength of my convictions. Sometimes it is simply for one's own edification that revisiting a topic is of value. I haven't settled on the very best way to document my efforts, but I have begun to organize and save key elements, and am occasionally very glad that I did it.

[@SabineHossenfelder]

That's indeed a most excellent point!

[@RT-mn2pb]

Sabine yes, of course we want you to do a session on how to evaluate experts. how do we know if they're competent, biased, full of BS, and all those other problems. It's SO hard to know who to trust. - thanks for your work.

[@user-rm2qj2jh4l]

This is a wonderful video!!! I read an article from NPR about you, and remembered that I had found your channel before, but never really delved in. I'm so glad I've now rediscovered your channel, you seem to have a very good, nuanced perspective of things! Thanks!

[@g1bC]

Someone once said something like “he who knows does not know, he who thinks he knows, knows.” The other one “I prefer questions I cannot answer, rather than answers I cannot question “. I wish I had thought of these. Please keep making your videos. As an MD,(Medical Dr ) the covid 19 issue is/has been the most frustrating time my career in 30 years.

[@slide6strings]

The question is not so much "who is an expert?" but "what is expertise?". Expertise tends to lead to humility based on how much we don't know. You do a good job sensibly filling the gaps and questioning hyperbolic conclusions. You offer excellent principles for finding reliable information. Love your t-shirt!! Wonder what it would say for social scientists? Social sciences are much more messy than physics, but so important to try to get a grip on our 21st century mayhem and m/disinformation.

[@jeanf6295]

Second hand sources like wikipedia or youtube science communicators can also be used to see what other people doing their own research came up with, discrepancies with your own results can help detecting mistakes or blind-spots, yours or theirs.

[@GlimmerOfLight]

Completely unexpected, but this video explained things I did not know, or wondered about, regarding journals, predatory journals, arXiv, conference proceedings, etc. I am an independent researcher, no PhD, with one peer reviewed publication in the IEEE Xplore, but I still do not know enough about how the academic sausage is made. THANK YOU: Integrity and fighting our own biases first!

[@gypsypixie544]

🌟 SABINE, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR DOING THIS VIDEO🌟 You covered & presented this so beautifully, not to mention humbly as well. I’m a musician these days, but my background is in psych & neuroscience, with work experience in medical research. My own approach to explaining this would (and still does) tire out attention span…I’ll just send this video now instead to cover it, haha and yay ;) I especially love that you included a sticking point that even occurs when researching within one’s own field, that “numbers are your friends”. The nuances and potential implications of a body of work/ research live in the numbers & data in a way that words cannot touch, something we all are apt to forget, both within & without the sciences. Please keep up the wonderful work as a science communicator on this platform, know that you are so appreciated & loved, and just rock on just being your best self, hun ❤️🤘🏻 PS: A video covering p values and r coefficients would be WONDERFUL!!! SO much yes to that. :)

[@tobiasnijmeijer775]

Tried to find a good video for the p and r video's : this p-video from StatQuest is very good (much better than others I viewed): kzbin.info/www/bejne/rJbQi6d7gptmfbs as well as their R-squared etc. video's kzbin.info/www/bejne/mH7GlJehbaqXfdE , wanted that my statistics teachers had been so good at teaching me this subject.

[@kylezo]

this is the most direct and genuine sabine video she's ever put out i absolutely love it it's also like the most directly actionable and practical like this is such a legendary video omg

[@thescoobymike]

Sabine, people aren’t complaining that you’re doing your own research. It’s that your getting a lot of the facts wrong!

[@spaceman77777]

Your honest disclosure builds trust and clarity. That is high value thank you Sabine.

[@user-ky5dy5hl4d]

Not exactly. kzbin.info/www/bejne/l5-Ze5x4gbakjrs

[@henrik.norberg]

As a person with Aspergers Syndrom that have an obsession with understanding everything, I have read more than 10000 non fiction books, hundreds of research papers and everything else I got my hand on, I can say that I fully agree with what you say. I don't have any bias anymore because I have probability been wrong more times than anyone else and now I accept that most of what I know is wrong in one way or another. I don't trust anything completely, most importantly myself. So much that I don't think I have real opinions any longer, only X for and Y against for everything. My goal when doing research is that I try to prove what I know to be wrong, if I fail I value the knowledge I have higher otherwise I append my knowledge. I actually have started to like when I am wrong because that means I have learned something. Or like might be the wrong word, value might be a better one.

[@QuadsarX]

I'm really glad you point out comparing data to text, I've read so many studies that have data that is either entirely contradictory to the text of the paper or is misrepresented by it. And I've had many arguments over those studies with people who look only at the summaries of those papers and don't dive deeper into the data that the researchers actually collected. In my personal experience, this seems to be the most common mistake people make when reading scientific literature, at least within my social circles.

[@Kerostasis]

I still remember many years ago, participating in a forum discussion of a controversial scientific paper where the community spent 20 pages of discussion on the finer points of the methodology and possible confounding factors before anyone bothered to look at the data itself - and when we did, it outright contradicted the conclusion given by the authors in the abstract! I don't read enough papers in detail to have encountered this more than once, but that one time had a lasting impression on me.

[@Tinil0]

One of the precious few talents I actually have is doing research, and it's something I do surprisingly often in my own free time. Most of this stuff I already knew and practiced, but that tip about checking the recent citations of older papers to find reviews is brilliant, I never thought to do that and I am 100% adding that to my repertoire. I'm also going to share this video far and wide, because I am terrible at communicating and teaching, and when people ask for help with research I struggle to explain my methods. It's just stuff I do without consciously going through a checklist or whatever. I am so glad there are people like Sabine who are incredible at teaching and communicating.

[@Tinil0]

Oh, the only thing I would add is that for anything involving statistics you 100% want to check out the methodology. Don't trust anything that doesn't have a methodology available SOMEWHERE, even if you personally can't access it because, say, it costs money to have access. Statistics don't really lie, what they do do is leave out or obfuscate the context of how they were generated sometimes. The methodology will give you that context. You can see exactly what samples, constraints, and techniques are used to generate those statistics and so under what situations the final information is valid.

[@edwardlee2794]

Thanks Dr Sabine, I have been following your broadcast for the last few years. And I feel so honored to be among your " followers' as so many of them are high quality people . While retired I found myself enthralled in particle physics and cosmology. Your video keep fuelling my "honorable addiction " thanks again and keep up the good work. From HK

[@mikerandolph3840]

Thank you for this informative video, Sabine. As someone with extensive experience in science and technology, I appreciate your effort to guide people on how to do their own research. However, I'd love to see a follow-up video that focuses on how to unbiasedly evaluate trusted sources. Even with my background, I find that the protocol you've outlined can be quite challenging to implement in practice. Instead, many of us rely on experts like yourself to sift through the information. A guide on how to identify and evaluate credible sources would be incredibly helpful.

[@ralphmacchiato3761]

She mentioned a follow-up video about reliability. Pay attention in class, please! :-)

[@davidinkster1296]

Much of the time, the people who will say 'you're not qualified...' do so because they lack any rational counter-argument. So keep on being rational, on any subject you damn well please!

[@user-om1pp5qe5z]

You are a scientist and you talk about science. The fit is ok by me. People always want to tell others what they can and can't do.

[@marcinniewiadomski568]

Sabine, you are the best, please, keep doing what you're doing. Cheers

[@Ghostthehumanist]

This vid really made me take a look at the quality of my research. These are easily integratable methods for the common human. Good looking out, Sabine. Also.. why wouldn't we want our scientists to look into other disciplines? Seems like that is exactly what we should want. Its a good way to bring unique perspectives, and it seems to be an excellent way to discover something new about your own field.

[@viscache1]

The idea that you must do your own research in order to speak on a subject is a clear message. That you can’t trust those doing the research to be unbiased…therefore making you wrong by quoting their work and making you biased. Recognizing experts is a whole science in itself…then you have to find one you trust.

[@Elements5025]

This is A very good rendition of why, in order to chace a goal - one needs to ascertain from all your studies the viability of it and then - you need, in addition to that - virtually untilimted amounts of time for contemplation. Which is impossible. I find it useful to keep in mind that even experts opines with loud voices - to the flavour of the times. ... There is no expert that can help you across this bridge; which you have to cross yourself, - having studied the the whole basis of the thing you are aiming to move... . Great Convo

[@victorzurkowski2388]

Do not ever stop making videos on topics other than Physics. We often have to form opinions on subjects that affect society. You have access to resources that are not accessible to everyone, and your scientific background lets you identify sources that do not pass muster. Because of that, your comments are well founded and valued by many.

[@RachelWilliams-um1en]

Hi, how are you doing 😊😊😊😊

[@damslifevlog5031]

Nothing beats authenticity. Thank you sabine for the value you provide the world.

[@christopherkopperman8108]

Two points. One, I understand why one might want to focus on peer reviewed papers but often times someone wants to do research because what the experts are saying doesn't make sense. There is a sort of momentum in science sometimes to go down a chosen path and most if not all peer reviewed research ends up down that path. Two, and I think very important, is brush up on reasoning. I had no idea how bad the average person's reasoning skills were until I started researching that. It isn't just bias but the many fallacies that people fall into that lead them to believe untrue things from the data that they did read.

[@belbras]

We do need a video about "how to recognize an expert", Sabine.👍👍 Another question is how to be able to detect paper research that isn't blemished by political (government, etc.)/monetary (big sponsors interests) influences.

[@jdos2]

I'm reminded of people like Herbert Simon - who were interested in EVERYTHING and publish on areas of interest far from their academic background (Political Scientist and Economist who won a Nobel prize, but also published on Artificial Intelligence among other topics). Keep doing you, Sabine. I'm sure you'll correct yourself when wrong, and continue to be extraordinarily informative.

[@user-xz2qy4xt8y]

Hi Sabine, very grateful for all you do here. Finding your channel has been a real treat. Keep on trucking. 😊

[@joyl7842]

I love that you decided to make a video about this. When I began watching your videos I was wondering about this topic, but I never felt strongly about it one way or the other. I think this was mostly because you are a scientist by trade and so I wasn't worried about it.

[@emmanuelbeaucage4461]

I tend to search against my opinion instead of for it. I find it help to see others point of view or to find counters arguments to my opinion i'm not even aware of.

[@megandresitox]

15:42 Exactly, looking at the data may be one of the strongest points to note here. The way it is structured on the methodology is also very important. Studies with wrong methodologies may give no-reliable results. I would love a video on p-values and how the “statistical significance” world works, so people learn to judge papers by looking at the data, not only learn “blindly” from them. Awesome work! ❤

[@danilooliveira6580]

but its by far the hardest part on doing the research, because a lot of it is VERY hard to read and need a lot of prior knowledge to properly understand it.

[@skiploupe]

Would love to see your explainer for common terms in scientific research like p values and confidence values. I think many folks would benefit from that. Thanks for all your work (and that of your team!)

[@ProjectDarkWolf]

Next time somebody complains why I (or just any educational channel) don't upload regularly, I'm just going to link here. Thank you for this.

[@DaveConsiglio]

Real science and real research isn't about letters after your name. It's about being truthful to what the data says. Don't listen to the trolls who say "stick to physics". Keep doing science - you're awesome.

[@danielpfeffer6759]

This is a very good introduction to research methodology. I have sent it to my daughter, who is starting University this year. I must add that I also enjoy the way you present topics on your channel.

[@aakkii5271]

Please do a video on recognizing experts!

[@zorktxandnand3774]

I am going to have a guess, and say that anyone caiming they know everything about whatever field they say they are an expert in, is in fact not an expert.

[@SueDoeNimh]

This is probably the most educational video I have ever seen on KZbin.