2025 RationalWiki 'Oregon Plan' Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!
Donations so far: $8765.50Goal: $10000

User:Scuter/sandbox

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
We're so glad you came
Sexuality
Icon sex.svg
Reach around the subject
Gender signs.png

Regnerus 2012

https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.03.009

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0049089X12000610

What does the study say?[edit]

So, what's wrong with the study?[edit]

Control for family instability[edit]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0049089X1500085X (this one got a response from regnerus)

https://www.sociologicalscience.com/articles-v2-23-478/

Rushed timeline[edit]

Random event error[edit]

https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2015/04/30/how-random-error-and-dirty-data-made-regnerus-even-wronger-than-we-thought/

Potential conflicts of interest[edit]

https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2015/04/17/regnerus-responds/

Other problems[edit]

https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/bad-science-on-top-of-stigma-for-lesbian-and-gay-parents/

CRITICISM OF PEER REVIEW PROCESS (don't forget paul amato): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0049089X12001652

https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2013/07/20/paul-amato-on-reviewing-regnerus/

funding: https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/more-managerial-than-intellectual/

  • The NFSS was supported in part by grants from the Witherspoon Institute and the Bradley Foundation. While both of these are commonly known for their support of conservative causes—just as other private foundations are known for supporting more liberal causes—the funding sources played no role at all in the design or conduct of the study, the analyses, the interpretations of the data, or in the preparation of this manuscript.

on the study being nationally representative: https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/what-is-nationally-representative/

What does it mean for the same-sex parent debate?[edit]

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/why-mark-regnerus-study-shouldnt-matter-even-if-it-were-the-most-scientifically-robust-study-in-the-world/

arg in possible support of gay marriage legalization (provide more security to gay couples and thus lead to less instability)

https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2013/03/01/marriage-denial/

https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2015/11/13/that-time-when-your-research-is-used-to-justify-ripping-a-baby-from-the-arms-of-its-loving-adoptive-parents/

Single parents/adoptive parents?[edit]

https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2015/10/30/regnerus-has-the-callous-disregard-for-poor-single-mothers-and-their-children-but-doesnt-get-policy/

How could the study be improved?[edit]

Academic response[edit]

FORMAL LETTER OF CONCERN BY 150+ SCIENTISTS: https://www.impactprogram.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Letter-to-the-editors-and-advisory-editors-of-Social-Science-Research.pdf

Additional resources[edit]

Notes[edit]

References[edit]