@FactsTruthsWin @legaltweetz Littman, seriously. Her study has been discredited soundly for having improper sampling and methodology. No one with any credibility takes her hypothesis seriously. Username does not check out bud, might be better to change it
@prax_ben @esjesjesj https://t.co/h4EosGXUEM This stuff is easy to find. If you wanted to find the truth you'd do a simple Google search, but you aren't interested in the truth, you're interested in being a right wing grifter so this is fruitless
@Kimberl56843016 @YammerPsaka @pudgenet @chrisiousity @pinkyandthejay @Katja_Thieme @Theo_TJ_Jordan @XanderSisco questionable methods (https://t.co/Q7UMAoFCf1, https://t.co/VblTLt2eQt), that other work does not lend support to its conclusions (https://t.co
@lecanardnoir @MechaniVal Lack of a control group in the 2018 Littman study, for one. In addition to her misapplications of the DSM, where she oversimplified the criteria for gender dysphoria so that parents could easily use that criteria. https://t.co/T
@Day1Woman @Mysticwolfsims Christ rogd isn't real. https://t.co/zsY6uaFGoL
@lindseyannroy11 @KatyMontgomerie I'm posting these here, because the other posts are below. Blanchard was wrong. And that study is deeply flawed. https://t.co/hrM7fe3Smz https://t.co/vFvTn08pLw
@lindseyannroy11 @Aalphabat @KatyMontgomerie That study is flawed. For one, it only asked the opinion of parents, not the actual people. 2, the methodology of the study was off. https://t.co/vFvTn08pLw
@LanarkLanark https://t.co/ZUizstJDQD Selection and Samplingと Measurementsを参照してくださいね
@4zoP8 @kongyouguai >そのバイアスを踏まえた上で シュライア含めROGD支持者はそれが出来てないから問題なんですよ https://t.co/ZUizstJDQD
@Ca_Tire_Fort @stephane_gillot @libe Balayer d'un revers de main, OK. Quelles sont tes sources maintenant, si jamais tu as lu ne serait-ce que l'étude de littman. https://t.co/9uTl8YzoUD https://t.co/9h5lgqvrcZ https://t.co/VibLrN4ulh
@streamkamala @takec_takeshi https://t.co/ZUizstJ615 「また、この論文で懸念されるのは、保護者回答者の人口統計学的プロフィールである。 特筆すべきは、76.5%が自分の子供のトランス識別は正しくないと考えており、特に "ROGD "の概念を声高に宣伝する親が
@forexneworleans @axiomatichoe @_WhyAreYouHere_ @SporkWitch @texandogdad @AriDrennen This study has been retracted because the methodology is completely flawed, since it took data from the opinions of the parents and not empyrical data about the health of
@statsforgender Lisa Littman? You might as well cite Andrew Wakefield. She is completely disgraced. No one takes her seriously. https://t.co/fJz3rKnB1a
@MagdalenaLewa19 @RafalPiton @Herzyk1 Jeżeli NAPRAWDĘ nie rozumiesz metodologii, to tutaj masz przykład, dlaczego gadasz głupoty. https://t.co/2ArV0kH0Qn
@my_real_name @JesseniaRamz @VMcCarthy15 @Psychgirl211 No she most certainly did not. Windbreaking, maybe. https://t.co/ymBg6mVo9j
@posssco @kelvin_morganNZ Littman's 'Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria' Hypothesis is not supported by the clinical evidence. It's based on interviews with gender hostile parents and not on studies of actual trans youth which contradict her claims. https://t.co
@KnottiBuoy @solveig283 application (https://t.co/3I87mJO7uv), there's evidence against it (https://t.co/3eQCvJ8qEt), & the evidence for it is, as you've pointed out, based on methods that shouldn't instil that level of confidence in the central claim
@Kovichium This one’s accessible https://t.co/oN96CGktcn
@CelesteFinally If u read that trash, u must also read this https://t.co/PpvVHe9rS4
@DavidGreenslit @Alyssa3467 @Kat_G_S_ @KatyMontgomerie here's a methodological critique of the source used, just in case you're unsatisfied. https://t.co/TKIKTOFOXB
@DerbiBanan11020 https://t.co/st8DUyL1gp Problem je bil, da so spraševali zgolj starše in vzeli njihove trditve za face value. Noben se ni vprašal koliko časa press so o tem razmišljali tin
@RoeliendenOuden @RoisinMichaux She didn't speak to a single trans person, but instead parents of trans kids that hate their trans kids. It's the worst study ever attempted to be passed off as science https://t.co/33KXM7m8k9
@cupperty @CharleequinJ @The_DogWalker @merryment24 This and the study references are by Lisa Littman, a woman known for her methodological failures. She's the woman who invented the term "Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria", for which she provides no diagnostic
@pickledswans @benryanwriter @LeorSapir @LisaLittman1 @jack_turban Sure but the question she was asking was something the parents had no way of knowing Nevermind where she found those parents https://t.co/RwVFcZ8w9E
@floofskan25399 @_Plac3_hold3r @PurifierAzrael I don't think you actually read it which is also why I have been laughing my ass off so much because of the irony. The study was trashed and goes against what you stand for lmao https://t.co/vQH1uU07iD
@jonvafc @helenstaniland @NinoushkaLondon @bindelj @Telegraph Anyone can post it but also anyone can use google 🤣 https://t.co/fOOcFgza5r
@statsforgender Wouldn’t somebody pushing stats be honest enough to disclose that this study had to be withdrawn due to flaws in methodology? Or that it has been thoroughly debunked? https://t.co/fniFTn5Qnn
リサ・リットマンの調査手法そのものが批判されている典型的な論文 https://t.co/2qvGNwNujs 概要のGoogle翻訳 https://t.co/58jkh6Cl9u 調査手法の問題点が概要でも事細かに読める。
@KR500_Kai 反証を挙げるならこちらでしたね。 https://t.co/2qvGNwNujs 概要のGoogle翻訳 https://t.co/58jkh6Cl9u
@radfem_t @ComunidadMadrid Otro ejemplo, en el que se critica la metodología del estudio original, que consistió en reclutar padres y madres en foros de internet con un sesgo anti-trans: https://t.co/g40BE9AqUQ
RT @licsak25: @KR500_Kai @takec_takeshi 元の記事を読めなかった場合に備え、Splinger Natureが指摘したLittman's(2018)研究標本の不備についてリンクを貼る。 https://t.co/2qvGNwNujs 翻訳 h…
@KR500_Kai @takec_takeshi 元の記事を読めなかった場合に備え、Splinger Natureが指摘したLittman's(2018)研究標本の不備についてリンクを貼る。 https://t.co/2qvGNwNujs 翻訳 https://t.co/byCX3AX2sb 明らかにリットマンの手法の不備だ。
メモ Methodological Critique of Littman’s (2018) Parental-Respondents Accounts of “Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria” - PMC https://t.co/Cq3j6TOjaB
@lecanardnoir A thorough critique of the methodology of the study is here: https://t.co/Ls3EvfE27e
@blackbeartooth @eric_bellMB @PremierScottMoe At least in the case of Sweden, the government commissioned review of research cites the Littman study, which has been so widely criticized in peer review, that the journal who published it pulled it within a w
@Davek1983 @Lisawesterveld @transzorgnu De methodes van haar onderzoek waren niet zorgvuldig en is al door andere onderzoekers verworpen. Er is niet zoiets als rapid onset gender dysphoria. https://t.co/ZetStgIBL8
@SjaakUit @wierdduk @telegraaf Voorspelbaar dat je met Littman komt aanzetten. Dat onderzoek is zachtjes gezegd behoorlijk afgekraakt. Littmann interviewde ouders, die zichzelf ook konden melden voor dit onderzoek, niet de kinderen zelf. Zie ook https://t.
RT @43752083470g: @CherylKerkin @Tidmouthfireman @fritzdrybeam @LGBwiththeT And here are two scientific articles directly refuting the orig…
@CherylKerkin @Tidmouthfireman @fritzdrybeam @LGBwiththeT And here are two scientific articles directly refuting the original study: https://t.co/2PhAy4i0lm https://t.co/de7Qh554e1 It's not a difference of opinion. You're provably wrong, and it's not auth
@jesswana @7NewsSpotlight To be honest, I attempted to keep the original post short for Twitters character count, but I am happy to expand with evidence for each point. Here is a SAMPLE debunking ROGD https://t.co/qBBAomMlLe https://t.co/R0h44B17h1 htt
@thomas_drrer @FHustede @GodenrathK @antischwurbler Hier dann noch die Ausführungen wieso die ROGD-Studie absoluter Stuss ist. Wie die Argumentation von der "Study Nurse" https://t.co/tutwpaERii
@BobWhencer @GoddessOf_Trash @argodux @MrPostsGood @TomislavCivcija @sciam Wait, seriously? That study had so many flaws it's got entire studies ABOUT how flawed it is: it's the Valiant tank of bad studies. How it managed to not get retracted is beyond ima
@HumanValues2020 @PinkNews no thanks but i assume you're referencing the rapid-onset gender dysphoria study, which was proven faulty and retracted from journals. https://t.co/UPdThcwdZ1
@kittypurrzog Hey cool way to completely ignore the actual, substantive criticisms of the concept itself. 👍 If you ever get inspired to abandon the hollow, cowardly sniping and get curious: https://t.co/Or4xtAs8aO
vgl. https://t.co/gVBHZ8yXZq vgl. https://t.co/3h69NePFhx ausführliche Videoreihe zum Buch und 'ROGD' vgl. https://t.co/u6igLHpSax
@michaelshermer @HJoyceGender @RichardDawkins @sapinker @GadSaad @peterboghossian … Except when you interviewed Abigail Shrier, you never once challenged her about the fact that her entire book was based on one discredited study. Exposing junk science, i
@KyleLCrawford @SethAndrewsTTA And the Littman study that proposed social contagion theory is such a joke it's honestly shameful it even got published at all. Her methodology and data collection were horrendously biased: https://t.co/uw5t12ailR
@feuerbringer @txreto Zu ROGD siehe auch die Kritik https://t.co/V2IYebBbaS
@JonLarie @bariweiss https://t.co/4K95PXTU75 You can read this There's also this which is for the earlier paper however the points about selection of participants continues to apply https://t.co/EvjRk7Kns7 I don't think it's a stretch to say if you want
@EveBilly555 @KatyMontgomerie @jk_rowling ROGD doesn't exist. It came from an extremely flawed "study". https://t.co/J10psSGF1E https://t.co/vizJbFyowh https://t.co/nRKUFk2Ybd https://t.co/EIqSwykbwr
@michaelshermer @billprady Hey @michaelshermer, If you are ‘not anti-trans’ - may I ask why, in your interview with Abigail Shrier, you didn’t ask her why she relied so heavily on a discredited study for her entire thesis? Isn’t exposing junk science a pa
@wesyang Why do you propagate the ROGD myth? People who actually know what they're talking about have looked at it and said "Uh, yeah, that's not scientific." One might almost think that you're a shameless grifter. https://t.co/VdUpi3TKOp
@KLongthorp @JenniferAnne_s @Wommando Social Contagion Hypothesis: https://t.co/DfFmVrHPpH https://t.co/qsdZKxCQj9 https://t.co/eU5szjZgzP https://t.co/lgvSJw3urJ
@LeaningLeft46 @mrsdclemons @boobygender @g_lamarche @HelenWebberley Link to the issues with the Littman study that proposed ROGD. https://t.co/VAjgJdxSYU
@MestizoBobbyHil @fallenigloos @amyalkon @JHarsh39476 @katiedimartin @lluaces @BlanchardPhD @profjmb @slatestarcodex That is the claim presented by Littman, and purportedly tested in the paper, but it is not necessarily part of the definition of ROGD. This
@BitterTonic @LeorSapir @mattyglesias Where'd I say anything is ok? Back to the science. Did you read the study in question? Others have, and they have also written critiques. (Although it doesn't take a social science major to point to the fundamental sa
@Naglfar94Games @KHAOSANIMA418 @00DaniPonie I'd say one paper that everyone has poked holes in for selection bias worse than Andrew Wakefield's. https://t.co/jXLWa98tt2
RT @BeeGayDooCrimes: @findtheeswing1 Well, someone was faster than me, now stay polite or sit down. I wont tolerate that attitude under my…
@findtheeswing1 Well, someone was faster than me, now stay polite or sit down. I wont tolerate that attitude under my posts 👍🏻
@DidUGetBooted2 @adulthumanorbit @kelly_cadigan @DarkMoonChaos The Archives of Sexual Behavior published a methodological critique of the paper that ROGD is based on. What are your sources for this so-called 'social contagion'? https://t.co/UA0JUuFHqD
@JoeyMannarinoUS https://t.co/eD7qG7ZemN just dropping this here 🥰
@Back_0n_Twatter @JoeyMannarinoUS Simply information showing the flaws in drawing these conclusions from the original study. Here, this might be more of what you’re looking for. https://t.co/28wXnQNhGt
@MarginalSafety @AlanHarvey67 @FamilyDrBen ROGD has been debunked. The sample Littman used was flawed from the outset. https://t.co/fTeG3rKexY
@WhoKnowsAnymre @kevinburch @SayreGamble @Helenreflects @Anthrofuentes The complaint that it's being treated "unfairly" is ridiculous. "ROGD" has been criticised on methodological and theoretical grounds (e.g., https://t.co/VAvt32u0HB, https://t.co/nt31Kiv
@LeftySwerve @RebeccaAVelo @kurenaixiii @waxmonke @TheAtlantic @helenlewis A thorough critique of the ROGD idea is here. https://t.co/tlbXGFKGVW
@IsaChildProtect @Canada_Flag_Guy @TRHLofficial Futr rebuttal and critique https://t.co/PNEpklWCYa
@RationalStoic @RodFlemingWorld @SaraJane101 @TRHLofficial And there's also the cretique on it by Springer link. See https://t.co/PNEpklWCYa https://t.co/Nqg7LOIs3Z
@TRHLofficial This study is an online questionaire of parents There is absolutely no data collected on their offspring besides the parents report To anyone interested I highly recommend reading this commentary on the studies methodology: https://t.co/S0d
@TRHLofficial This would be Littman’s study right? The one that was heavily critiqued for methodological flaws, most notably for recruiting it’s sample of parents from people visiting websites that advised parents not to accept their kids trans identities
@DadsRogd @speakoutsister @LisaLittman1 And another! https://t.co/I66LTOXY9q But I thought you did research? 🤔 Guess you found answers that said what you want and stopped looking, eh? Your ignorance is cringey!
@say_hi_to_lucy @CherylKerkin @piffavuri @MForstater Also worth mentioning this work (https://t.co/h4sP6oSKSX, https://t.co/oyzDAppoty) critiquing the original study, and more recent work that doesn't rely on nonsense sites like Trend (https://t.co/RygJxx0
@orangetiger70 @cheomitII @HeydonEmily @caitlinmoriah Claims without Falsifiable evidence are not science there is no Falsifiable evidence of social contagion the one study conducted was so full of basic methodological errors it had to be withdrawn https:/
Interesting....seems the critic of the 2018 study is a transpinay: 1.https://t.co/T27gKTzq74 2.https://t.co/wfoJmP2FZr
@RogerEA5 @againstgrmrs 1. The studies make bad assumptions, such as assuming that one who stop going to get treatment desisted, ignoring factors like cost, social pressure, etc. Also just counting people who weren’t trans as desisting. 2. https://t.co/
@TPostMillennial See also: https://t.co/ZZcXFsie9T
@MikeRos09539692 @Rushthewriter Here you go bud. You may want to know that despite what you may have heard,an open letter from parents is not the science you think it is.https://t.co/BCC3zEO7rm
@JuliaMasonMD1 Littman's paper used an anti-trans group of parents as their source (which I'm sure you're well aware of) and didn't actually use data directly from the children involved. I'm guessing this is why you're defending it with "friendship" rath
Previous speaker is eluded to Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, which is a thoroughly debunked study. https://t.co/qwcSd3WqKV