https://jabde.com/2024/10/31/would-chad-love-me-as-a-worm/

Transcript:

Ever since I saw the trend on TikTok, I had to know if my boyfriend Chad would still love me if I were a worm. After sampling Chad by directly asking him on camera at least 25 times for statistical significance, ANOVA analysis revealed that he would indeed still love me if I were a worm. Unfortunately, previous studies regarding direct sampling of questions of romantic commitment, though proving similarly statistically significant, have not withheld independent validation tests. This replication crisis has revealed a worrying uncertainty. If this study were validated, it would likely show that Chad might not love me if I were a worm! It is impossible to validate the previous study as I am not able to turn into a worm. In this paper, the worm love question will be validated indirectly by exhibiting worm like behavior, appearance, and sexual practices to measure Chad’s response and therefore his true commitment to me. Analysis found that per behavior there is around a 39% percent chance that Chad will love me the same or more, a 34% percent chance that he will love me much less and a 27% chance that he loves me more because he got really worried at the end

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldMEnglish
    6·
    2 hours ago

    For accessibility and verification purposes, we require a transcript of the relevant portion of the screenshot. Since I think every post hasn’t done this so far, I’m just going to do it myself for these first ones instead of being a nag (also, please clarify if using a satirical journal in the future):

    • Transcript: “Ever since I saw the trend on TikTok, I had to know if my boyfriend Chad would still love me if I were a worm. After sampling Chad by directly asking him on camera at least 25 times for statistical significance, ANOVA analysis revealed that he would indeed still love me if I were a worm. Unfortunately, previous studies regarding direct sampling of questions of romantic commitment, though proving similarly statistically significant, have not withheld independent validation tests. This replication crisis has revealed a worrying uncertainty. If this study were validated, it would likely show that Chad might not love me if I were a worm! It is impossible to validate the previous study as I am not able to turn into a worm. In this paper, the worm love question will be validated indirectly by exhibiting worm like behavior, appearance, and sexual practices to measure Chad’s response and therefore his true commitment to me. Analysis found that per behavior there is around a 39% percent chance that Chad will love me the same or more, a 34% percent chance that he will love me much less and a 27% chance that he loves me more because he got really worried at the end”
    • m_fOPEnglish
      2·
      44 minutes ago

      Good call, edited post to add transcript. Any opinion on format for marking satire?

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldMEnglish
        2·
        22 minutes ago

        Maybe just a [Satire] tag at the start. Biggest gripe with Lemmy by far is lack of flairs, although I know that isn’t their fault.

  • Emotional_Series7814@kbin.melroy.org
    3·
    1 hour ago

    The author appears to be Dr. Tiffany Love.

    I thought the name was far too fitting so I searched online. The university is not real and the author probably made up the name, but funnily enough there is a real human woman Dr. Tiffany Love in the healthcare field!

    EDIT: I’m an idiot and it’s the B McGraw guy you see closer to the top. He fooled me good.

    Also,

    Journal of Astrological Big Data Ecology Premium source for made up science

    This is a parody site. I didn’t read the header immediately so I didn’t pick up on that. (Yes, I can be very oblivious and dumb sometimes.) So not actually a valid study with a wild title and some wild text but actual findings. Still made me laugh though.