The study investigates the influence of experimenter bias on perceptions of climate change effects on insect species, classifying them as desirable or undesirable. Findings reveal no significant differences in climate change impacts on these species, hinting at an absence of bias, though the small sample size and unequal distribution may affect the results. Despite the consensus on climate change being human-induced, the study suggests more comprehensive research is needed to confirm these findings.

1. Sarah Ginsberg, Leah Azizian, Steven Zaslowsky
Sarahoops77@aol.com, oazizian1@gmail.com, stevenzaz@yahoo.com
Macaulay Honors College at CUNY, Queens College of CUNY
The problem
Take home messages
Abstract
Climate change is an area of significant controversy. The present study ascertained
the role of experimenter bias in determining the effects of global warming, by
evaluating whether the perception of insect species as desirable or undesirable would
be related to findings of climate change having beneficial or harmful effects.
Selective literature searches produced 21 articles,14 of which were classified as
desirable and 7 as undesirable. Mosaic plot and chi-square analyses found no
significant differences between groups classified as beneficial or harmful, suggesting
that there was no experimenter bias. However, the small number of studies evaluated
and the unequal distribution of desirable and undesirable species may have
contributed to sample selection bias thus making statistical significance difficult to
achieve.
The logic
Methods
Let’s talk about global warming
So..Seemingly significant…but not
Why might this be?
Works Cited
https://macaulay.cuny.edu/eportfolios/baker16
•In the course of any study in any subject biases has
the potential to play a major role
•Does bias impact the predicted effect of global
warming on certain species
• A scientists concern, or lack thereof, for a certain species will
not affect the chance that climate change will harm or hurt it if
they are truly unbiased
• Null hypothesis: Whether or not a species is considered a
desirable one or not should have no impact on what the
predicted effect climate change will have on them.
Mitchell
Baker
Predicted effect of climate
change
Blue:Count
Red: Expected
Help species Harm species
Desirable or
Undesirable
species
Desirable
7
8.8
14
12.2
Undesirable
6
4.2
4
5.8
Likelihood ratio χ2; χ2 =1.971, Probability> χ2 =0.16, df=1
• We used Wed of Science to find articles talking
about climate changes impact on insects
• Using terms such as ‘natural enemy’ or ‘pollinators’
we were able to identify many desirable species.
• Undesirable species were categorized by an insect as
’pests’ and specifically looking at mosquitoes.
• Most of the articles said explicitly whether climate
change helped or harmed the species. The ones in
which were apparently neutral, were categorized as
helping.
• Being that there was a plethora of articles available
to choose from, the sample size being 31 was due to
time constraints and a decision to cap it off
Although there is dispute among scientists about climate
warming, there is still widespread consensus that it is due to the
release of greenhouse gases by human activity.
According to the U.S. Global Change Research Program,
societally climate change has an effect on our health and
wellbeing. Human produced greenhouse gases cause an increase
in temperature that devastates crops, disrupts the ecosystem,
leads to wildfires and the rise of sea levels. Politically, climate
warming has been a subject of debate in policy making for
decades. While some believe human impact is significant and
rapid government action is necessary, others believe that human
action is trivial in combating climate change.
The Chi-Square analysis suggest there were no
significant differences in the climate effect
conclusions between desirable and undesirable
species, consistent with the null hypothesis of no
bias. However, the lack of differences observed
may be related to other extraneous variables.
There are a number of possible reasons why the
present study found no differences between desirable
and undesirable species as affected by climate
change. The number of articles analyzed belonging to
the undesirable species was very small (N=7), and so
the distribution of beneficial (n=5) and harmful (n=2)
effects may have been too small to achieve statistical
significance. Likewise, statistical significance may
have been hindered by selection bias as there was a
disproportionate number of articles representing
desirable (n=14) as compared to undesirable (n=7)
species.
Mitchell
Baker
• There seems to be no bias among scientists
take on climate change with regard to
desirable/undesirable species
• This might still not be totally true as a future
study can be done to try and gain more
accurate results