My bull **** detector seems to perk up whenever I read or hear about a new study that’s getting attention in the popular press. Many times the research is solid, but often, really too often, the claims made by the study are headline grabbing, misleading and in some cases down right irresponsible. In my first college statistics class my professor required us read a pocket sized book titled, “How to Lie with Statistics” – since then I don’t take much at face value because it is really easy to manipulate data to prove your point.
The research by Nova Southeastern University – in Florida – put out a press release that makes it sounds like 80% of poker players are using drugs to enhance performance. The exact language they use is “drugs and other substances”, but those other substances include Vitamin B12, caffeine, and energy drinks. They also include amphetamines (Ritalin, adderall, etc), weed, coke, so it’s not all fluff, but when you break down the numbers they aren’t nearly as dramatic as the headline makes it sound like.
Taking a closer look at the slide show they put up about their methods – I couldn’t find the research study itself – the 80% number means that 80% used one of these substances:
56% – Caffeine
41% – Energy Drinks
27% – Weed…..For Performance Enhancement??? Lol.
14% – Vitamin B12
11% – Guarana
6% – Coke
They also found that 17% use some kind of amphetamine (Ritalin, Adderall, etc). 38% of which were prescribed by a doctor.
(In that slide show you’ll see different percentages, but that’s because the percentages they use reduce the total number to only those people who reported ANY use of the substances in that particular category, and not as a percentage of the whole group – a common method of manipulating statistics)
Here’s the key statistic, the number that blew my mind when I saw it: 198. That’s the total number of people sampled! A tiny amount when considering the size of the poker population – Btw many polls that you hear people quoting on the news aren’t much better. The real problem I have with the number is the research team didn’t cite it in the press release. Responsible research in my opinion is one where researchers are open about the limitations of the research not just for the academic community (this limitation is cited in the presentation) but for the general public. It’s a responsibility that is taken too lightly and makes me question the motive of the research team.
——-
Side note – there was research done in the 90’s that proved that in psychological research when the lead researcher thought their thesis was correct before the study was done, the results confirmed their opinion. Which basically says that the opinions of the research team biases the outcome. Ironically another researcher came along to prove this research wrong, proved it to be false, and of course actually proved the first guys’ point brilliantly.
——-
So what conclusions can we draw from this? That poker players are using drugs to gain a mental edge. If this is news breaking, how did you find this blog?
You may read dramatic responses to this article, I read one imagining of poker superstars being whisked to the bathroom for a urine test, but really what has this research proves is absolutely nothing. The 198 people sample volunteered to take it after being solicited on poker forums like this post. The problem with self selected samples – people volunteering to give information – is that people have inherent motives in wanting to share their information. What is there reason – I won’t even being to speculate, but when you combine their motives along with the motives of the researchers – how can we possibly even get close to any certainty?
All research has its limitations. But just as in poker where you all have been able to create certain where unknowns previously existed – it just takes a lot of experience, knowledge and repetition to create certainty or damn near close enough certainty to make a solid decision.
At this point, the research proves nothing, except that perhaps it’s something worth studying more. If it that happens the question I’d like to know is how much, if any, are these drugs actually enhancing the player’s performance? My biased theory is not much if any.
You can also post comments or follow the conversation at DragTheBar & on 2+2.
