Like probably many of us on here research plays an important part in our jobs, whether you lead research projects, have to make changes because of research or simply have to read it. The truth is it is extremely difficult for there not to be some bias. For researchers to carry out a project they have to acquire knowledge of the subject and that will form some kind of opinion. Most research will have positive and negative conclusions. Panorama and Lucozade research will be no different. It’s how you present those outcomes that give the bias and actually the same research will be presented in different ways for different audiences, so publicly some aspects will be highlighted, to the board and management staff of a company other aspects may be the drivers. Most people do not read the detail in a report, they read the conclusions and/or recommendations. In a previous job I have written some technical reports where the format expected for reports was that it started with an Executive Summary and I know that was all some people read, not the 50+ pages of research that followed it.
Last night did not really include anecdotal evidence. Although this carries little evidential weight, when you are dealing with consumers it does provide important perspective. Anecdotally I would say most experienced runners on here know they don’t need to worry too much about hydration and nutrition for runs under 10 miles, but do like the comfort of a gel or sports drink when running long. I think most know the benefit of good shoes, though may be highly sceptical of the claims made in some of the adverts.
So probably the programme left as many questions as we would all have had before.
And they still didn’t tell you how many jelly babies to eat on a 2 hour run?
