ArticleCold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology2014
What type of person are you? Old-fashioned thinking even in modern science.
Article in Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Population genetic considerations for using biobanks as international resources in the pandemic era and beyond.BMC genomics · 2021Pooled it
- Recent advances in the study of fine-scale population structure in humans.Current opinion in genetics & development · 2016Review
- Atlas of Cryptic Genetic Relatedness Among 1000 Human Genomes.Genome biology and evolution · 2016Article
- Perspectives on Human Variation through the Lens of Diversity and Race.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
People around the world have folk origin myths, stories that explain where they came from and account for their place in the world and their differences from other peoples. As scientists, however, we claim to be seeking literal historical truth. In Western culture, typological ideas about human variation are at least as ancient as written discussion of the subject, and have dominated both social and scientific thinking about race. From Herodotus to the Biblical lost tribes of Israel, and surprisingly even to today, it has been common to view our species as composed of distinct, or even discrete groups, types, or "races," with other individuals admixed from among those groups. Such rhetoric goes so much against the well-known evolutionary realities that it must reflect something deep about human thought, at least in Western culture. Typological approaches can be convenient for some pragmatic aspects of scientific analysis, but they can be seductively deceiving. We know how to think differently and should do so, given the historical abuses that have occurred as a result of typological thinking that seem always to lurk in the human heart.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.