this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2023
467 points (82.9% liked)

News

22890 readers
3782 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Hobo@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What're you talking about? The study linked has 43 references and has been cited 140 times. It even has their method and approach pretty clearly stated right at the start of the paper where they outline where they gathered their data from. Did you click the wrong link or something?

[–] Murvel@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It doesn't even have a list of sources that I can find. Where did you find it in the linked article ?!

[–] Hobo@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

So this is the link in question:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263585668_Men_Are_More_Likely_than_Women_to_Slow_in_the_Marathon

And you don't see a research paper with citations?

Here's a screenshot of the end of the paper that displays the links to the citations and references:

Here's a screenshot at the end of the paper with links to citations and references.

Here's the full abstract as well just for further clarification:

Unlabelled: Studies on nonelite distance runners suggest that men are more likely than women to slow their pace in a marathon. Purpose: This study determined the reliability of the sex difference in pacing across many marathons and after adjusting women's performances by 12% to address men's greater maximal oxygen uptake and also incorporating information on racing experience. Methods: Data were acquired from 14 US marathons in 2011 and encompassed 91,929 performances. For 2929 runners, we obtained experience data from a race-aggregating Web site. We operationalized pace maintenance as the percentage change in pace observed in the second half of the marathon relative to the first half. Pace maintenance was analyzed as a continuous variable and as two categorical variables, as follows: "maintain the pace," defined as slowing <10%, and "marked slowing," defined as slowing ≥30%. Results: The mean change in pace was 15.6% and 11.7% for men and women, respectively (P < 0.0001). This sex difference was significant for all 14 marathons. The odds for women were 1.46 (95% confidence interval, 1.41-1.50; P < 0.0001) times higher than men to maintain the pace and 0.36 (95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.38; P < 0.0001) times that of men to exhibit marked slowing. Slower finishing times were associated with greater slowing, especially in men (interaction, P < 0.0001). However, the sex difference in pacing occurred across age and finishing time groups. Making the 12% adjustment to women's performances lessened the magnitude of the sex difference in pacing but not its occurrence. Although greater experience was associated with less slowing, controlling for the experience variables did not eliminate the sex difference in pacing. Conclusions: The sex difference in pacing is robust. It may reflect sex differences in physiology, decision making, or both.

[–] Murvel@lemm.ee -5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Wtf are you stupid, this isn't the linked article in this thread? Did you just link some random study?

[–] Hobo@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

This is the article from the above comment you replied to. Like literally a few comments up from here.

https://lemmy.world/comment/5428995

[–] Murvel@lemm.ee -4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah and I'm talking about the article in this post, you know from the comment thread were are in... 🙄

[–] Hobo@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

That's very unclear from your reply above. Do you always act so condescending when people seek clarification? Because even this short conversation with you has been challenging. Perhaps try to be a little less of an asshole. It would be easier to clear simple communication issues especially when you use pronouns and the antecedent isn't really clear.

[–] Murvel@lemm.ee -4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes, especially when people start lecturing me that I'm wrong when they haven't even made an effort to understand the issue at hand. All just to prove that I'm so wrong and they're so right.

Happens more often than you think and I really don't like it.

[–] Hobo@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Right so change it. People are going to meet hostility with hostility. If you approach every conversation from an advsarial position you'll get a lot of "I'm right and you're wrong" and "lecturing" from the other side. If you had simply clarified that your vague statement was about the original article, and not the one linked in the comment you replied to, then we could've walked away with a positive interaction...

[–] Murvel@lemm.ee -2 points 10 months ago

Right, or just make an effort to read up on the conversation.