Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!

Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
D_Marao
Visitor
D_Marao
Who on earth taught Michael Noer to cite? I’m not expecting perfect APA format or something, but giving the paltry information he did is absurd. You can’t just give a journal name and a year, or just give a title, if you’re going to mention something as specific as an academic journal article or, heavens help us, a paper which might have been published who-knows-where.

I’m tempted to dig around for these articles and take a look, since sociology is a passion of mine, but with the scant evidence given there’s no certainty I’ll even find the right ones. That’s completely unacceptable, even for an opinion piece.

One hates to cast suspicion, but it’s hard not to wonder if Mr. Noer actually wanted anyone else to be able to find his vaulted scientific evidence.

08-26-2006 09:55 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

I thought the exact same thing.  At minimum, a citation should include article title, author, journal name and month and year of publication.  And that’s stretching it.

08-26-2006 10:11 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
IWentThere
Contributor
IWentThere

That, too, was my first impression on reading his “piece”.  I couldn’t help but wonder why he was not listing his sources in the proper manner.

As a writer, I find this appallingly unprofessional, and as a skeptic – disturbingly suspicious.

08-26-2006 10:16 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

I’m as appalled that Elizabeth Corcoran didn’t cite her sources either! She didn’t even give a Journal name or year! Unless of course you consider her personal opinion on her marriage to be a viable source. No bias there.

08-26-2006 10:36 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

She didn’t claim peer-reviewed evidence.  Why would we criticize her for improper citations?

Duh.

08-26-2006 10:40 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
IWentThere
Contributor
IWentThere

I’m as appalled that Elizabeth Corcoran didn’t cite her sources either! She didn’t even give a Journal name or year! Unless of course you consider her personal opinion on her marriage to be a viable source. No bias there.

She didn’t claim peer-reviewed evidence.  Why would we criticize her for improper citations?

Duh.

There is only one word that comes to mind upon reading this discourse.

Owned.

08-26-2006 10:44 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

08-26-2006 10:48 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

She didn’t claim peer-reviewed evidence.  Why would we criticize her for improper citations?

Duh.

My point exactly. She didn’t claim “any.” Get it???

08-26-2006 10:50 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

C2shiningC wrote:
My point exactly. She didn’t claim “any.” Get it???
And our point is that, for all his willingness to provide a way for others to evaluate his evidence, Mr. Noer might as well not have either.

Geez this is getting retarded.

08-26-2006 10:52 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

Geez, he gave you the Journal and year. Google it! If you’re determined to find the source narrowed down to the paragrah/sentence, write him or Forbes an email/letter. Sheesh do I have to do the thinking for you??!?  At least he gave you something to go on, EC only ranted and cited no periodical review.

And by the way, it’s Saturday night, shouldn’t you be out with your “man” that you mentioned in another post?

08-26-2006 11:03 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

C2shiningC wrote:
Geez, he gave you the Journal and year. Google it!
That wasn’t the point either.  People who are interested in sharing information make it as easy as possible for you to look at their evidence.  People who want to cite studies which don’t really support their thesis for the sake of a cloak of legitimacy will use crappy citations.  That’s the point.

At least he gave you something to go on, EC only ranted and cited no periodical review.
Her response required no evidence.  It was simple commonsense: if a man wants to avoid career women as mates, it’s evidently because he doesn’t want to make the effort and would prefer a more traditional woman who will do all the work for him.  Thus her title about not marrying lazy men.  No citations needed.

She addressed his opinion with as much legitimacy as it deserved: very little.

And by the way, it’s Saturday night, shouldn’t you be out with your “man” that you mentioned in another post?
I’m not feeling well.  I can’t really leave the house as a result of an occasionally *need* to rush to the bathroom and throw up.  So I told him to go out by himself and tie one on for me.

08-26-2006 11:10 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
IWentThere
Contributor
IWentThere

And by the way, it’s Saturday night, shouldn’t you be out with your “man” that you mentioned in another post?

Why is it that when these boys, (I will not say men – my fiance is a man, my father is a man), are proven wrong they feel compelled to resort to personal attacks?

So C2. . .why are you home on a Saturday night?

08-26-2006 11:14 PM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

People who are interested in sharing information make it as easy as possible for you to look at their evidence.
Sounds like the NY Times
She addressed his opinion with as much legitimacy as it deserved: very little.
I’ll take you for your word: her opinon means very little.
I’m not feeling well. So I told him to go out by himself and tie one on for me.
Lol. Sorry to hear you got dumped. But be brave, men are like buses, another one will be along in 20 minutes. And to the other poster, I’m in the PSTzone, my night doesn’t begin for another 2 hours. That is, if my careergal will let me. Shh, don’t tell her I’m online!

By the way, thank you WilloWist for answering all these ladies concerns by linking the URL sources for them!! Ironic that ladies (I mean liberal ladies) are helpless without a man. Even more ironic that it was a man who came to these ladies’ rescue!

08-27-2006 12:01 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
Marta2003
Regular Contributor
Marta2003

Nice response.  I see you were unable to actually answer for anything.

I’ve got to go: the boyfriend is on his way back home to play cards with me and friends.

08-27-2006 12:04 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
IWentThere
Contributor
IWentThere

By the way, thank you WilloWist for answering all these ladies concerns by linking the URL sources for them!! Ironic that ladies (I mean liberal ladies) are helpless without a man. Even more ironic that it was a man who came to these ladies’ rescue!

You are missing the point.  It’s great that the sources were located and posted, (even though his use of them are questionable), however, he failed to present his sources in proper APA format.  How many people are going to have the time to track down the sources used?  That was the argument – not the question of their existance.

And what makes you assume that WilloWisp is a male?

Nice try.

08-27-2006 12:12 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

Sure sure Marta… bf is on the way home. lol

Sorry to say iWentThere, most articles don’t list APA MPA format. Par for the course.

08-27-2006 12:18 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
IWentThere
Contributor
IWentThere

Actually, when an article is using “facts” from an outside source, as Mr. Noer has, it is considered integral and professional to cite said source.  If you research any article that has used “facts” from another source, you will notice this.

And after reading several of the sources that WilloWisp had posted – I can see why he didn’t want people reading them.

You still didn’t answer my other question – why do you assume WilloWisp is a man?

08-27-2006 12:25 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

Who on earth taught Michael Noer to cite? I’m not expecting perfect APA format or something, but giving the paltry information he did is absurd. You can’t just give a journal name and a year, or just give a title, if you’re going to mention something as specific as an academic journal article or, heavens help us, a paper which might have been published who-knows-where.

I’m tempted to dig around for these articles and take a look, since sociology is a passion of mine, but with the scant evidence given there’s no certainty I’ll even find the right ones. That’s completely unacceptable, even for an opinion piece.

One hates to cast suspicion, but it’s hard not to wonder if Mr. Noer actually wanted anyone else to be able to find his vaulted scientific evidence.

In just 15 minutes of online sleuthing I was able to locate a source of the original article, which was deeply researched and annotated.  I was also able to download many of the papers, articles and cites in his original bibliography of sources, which was in the original slideshow of nine pages.  This was the original article that was pulled and revised and put into a “Point-Counterpoint” format that lacked bibliographic sources.

I can only conclude that the critics of his alleged ‘mis-citing’ are being specious, disingenuous, or just intellectually unmotivated and dishonest.

He backed it up, and it is apparent with just a cursory glance of the sources that he did quite a bit of research to support the original article.  One of the sources is a 25 year old book that had to be purchased and read, as it is not posted online.

Message Edited by leeraconteur on 08-27-2006 01:03 AM

Message Edited by leeraconteur on 08-27-2006 01:07 AM

Message Edited by leeraconteur on 08-27-2006 01:07 AM

08-27-2006 12:55 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
IWentThere
Contributor
IWentThere

In just 15 minutes of online sleuthing I was able to locate a source of the original article, which was deeply researched and annotated.  I was also able to download half of the papers, articles and cites in his original bibliography of sources, which was in the original slideshow of nine pages.  This was the original article that was pulled and revised and put into a “Point Counterpoint” format.

Fair enough.  Unfortunately, I was unable to see the original article as it was pulled down before I had time to read it.  I was unaware that he had given a full bibliography of his sources.  This is actually relieving for me as it disturbed me greatly that Forbes would publish an article in such an unprofessional manner.

However, that is no excuse for not posting the sources now.  I mean, even the gossip blog “Oh No They Didn’t” demands sources for all facts presented.  Once again, the point is missed.  The article is presented without the sources readily available for perusal.  It doesn’t matter that you could locate the original article after “15 minutes of sleuthing”, the fact remains that it should be on the article, presented on the Forbes website, now.

When I first read it, I was more skeptical than anything.  That is not the impression you want to leave on a reader.  In retrospect, that is probably not the fault of Mr. Noer.  If it was an intentional, (or even unintentional), oversight of Forbes editing, then they do the reader, and Mr. Noer, a disservice.  I may not agree with what he says, but he certainly has a right to say it – and to have it presented in the manner he intended.

08-27-2006 01:15 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
Pelican
Regular Contributor
Pelican
Take more than a cursory glance at his sources, and you’ll find he misrespresented the results at worst, and wilfully misled at best.

08-27-2006 01:22 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
leeraconteur
Regular Contributor
leeraconteur

However, that is no excuse for not posting the sources now.  I mean, even the gossip blog “Oh No They Didn’t” demands sources for all facts presented.  Once again, the point is missed.  The article is presented without the sources readily available for perusal.  It doesn’t matter that you could locate the original article after “15 minutes of sleuthing”, the fact remains that it should be on the article, presented on the Forbes website, now.

Oh for Heaven’s Sake!  The reason the sources were pulled was because of the format of the new, fair, Equality Minded columns and the fact that women screamed bloody murder to have the original pulled.  This is all the result of those who complained.  The original was fine.

08-27-2006 01:30 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
IWentThere
Contributor
IWentThere

Oh for Heaven’s Sake!  The reason the sources were pulled was because of the format of the new, fair, Equality Minded columns and the fact that women screamed bloody murder to have the original pulled.  This is all the result of those who complained.  The original was fine.

And you know what?  This may be the only instance where we will agree.  It should not have been pulled.  Why?  Because it’s censorship.  He may be a sexist pig, but he has a right to his opinion, and to have it heard.

I believe you failed to read the remainder of my post – I even stated that this was the fault of Forbes editing.

08-27-2006 01:40 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
D_Marao
Visitor
D_Marao
Ah, I hadn’t seen the original article with the bibliography, only the version without. I’m glad to know there was one originally, but IWentThere has the right of it – that it was originally done correctly doesn’t change the fact that the way it’s presented now is completely unprofessional. And I don’t think The Feminists went in and hacked the Forbes site to remove a link to the bibliography from the new page, so blaming the lack on irate readers is absurd.

As for the laziness of not googling for the answers? Sure, mea culpa, it was lazy of me, but . . . it’s still the article’s responsibility to give that information. That is a circumstance where one is allowed to be lazy. The importance of citing your sources is something you learn in middle school, for crying out loud. My thanks to WillOWisp for providing the info, regardless.

(Incidentally, the fact that he referenced a 25-year-old book is not evidence for him having actually done the reading. That’s actually a trick that a friend – affectionately known amongst us as the King of Slackers – would do on his term papers in college. It would give the professor the impression he had done some digging during his research, which would make him look more credible and hard-working. What he actually did: find old books on the subject, flip to the appendices, find a few applicable references and work them into the paper with proper citations, and never even check the book out from the library, much less actually read it. Nobody ever called him out on it, apparently.)

08-27-2006 02:17 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

Ironic that the feminists were upset Noer’s article wasn’t “properly” cited in APA format when they are the ones who demanded it be removed along with the original article. More ironic they gave Corcoran a pass on citing sources to support her rant. No fear the men have come to your rescue… again!

Here’s the original article:

http://www.forbes.com/home/2006/08/23/Marriage-Careers-Divorce_cx_mn_land.html

And thank you to dflynn5656  for posting the original slideshow on another post titled The Slide Show text Forbes eliminated. The text is listed below:

Here is the text and research notes for the conclusions (the Forbes pulled)in Noer’s article on Forbes. It contains all the refrences, and notably – the studies cited where conducted in most cases by women. The following text was quickly eradicated by Forbes after a pandering response to angry feminists who complained. Without these study refrences below – the feminists could discredit and make the Noer article look like one angry man’s oppinion – rather than a credible research work based on 9 independant study efforts. Enjoy! (David) Nine Reasons to Steer Clear of Career Women: Slideshow 1. You are less likely to get married to her. So say Lee A. Lillard and Linda J. Waite of the University of Michigan’s Michigan Retirement Research Center. In a paper, “Marriage, Divorce and the Work and Earnings Careers of Spouses”, published in April, 2000, they found that for white women, higher earnings, more hours of employment and higher wages while single all reduce the chances of marriage. “This suggests that (1) success in the labor market makes it harder for women to make a marital match, (2) women with relatively high wages and earnings search less intensively for a match, or (3) successful women have higher standards for an acceptable match than women who work less and earn less.” Some research suggests the opposite is true for black women. Source: “Marriage, Divorce and the Work and Earnings Careers of Spouses,” Lee A. Lillard, Linda J. Waite, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center, Working Papers, April, 2000. 2. If you do marry, you are more likely to get divorced. In 2004, John H. Johnson examined data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and concluded that gender has a significant influence on the relationship between work hours and increases in the probability of divorce. Women’s work hours consistently increase divorce, whereas increases in men’s work hours often have no statistical effect. “I also find that the incidence in divorce is far higher in couples where both spouses are working than in couples where only one spouse is employed,” Johnson said. A few other studies, which have focused on employment (as opposed to working hours) have concluded that working outside the home actually increases marital stability, at least when the marriage is a happy one. But even in these studies, wives’ employment does correlate positively to divorce rates, when the marriage is of “low marital quality.” Sources: “A Treatise On The Family,” Gary S. Becker, Harvard University Press, 1981; “Do Long Work Hours Contribute To Divorce?” John H. Johnson, Topics in Economic Analysis and Policy, 2004; “Wives’ Employment and Spouses’ Marital Happiness,” Robert Schoen, Stacy J. Rogers, Paul R. Amato, Journal of Family Issues, April 2006. 3. She is more likely to cheat on you. According to a wide-ranging review of the published literature, highly educated people are more likely to have had extra-marital sex (those with graduate degrees are 1.75 more likely to have cheated than those with high school diplomas.) One April, 2005 study, by Adrian J. Blow for the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy summed it up: “If a woman has more education than her partner, she is more likely to have a sexual relationship outside of her primary relationship; if her husband has more education, she is less likely to engage in infidelity.” Additionally individuals who earn more than $30,000 a year are more likely to cheat. “In a more general sense, it appears that employment has significantly influenced infidelity over the years,” Blow said. “The work environment provides a host of potential partners, and individuals frequently find themselves spending a great deal of time with these individuals.” Source: “Infidelity in Committed Relationships II: A Substantive Review,” Adrian J. Blow, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, April 2005. 4. You are much less likely to have kids. According to the National Marriage Project, the incidence of childlessness is growing across the socioeconomic scale. In 2004, 20% of women over 40 remained childless. Thirty years ago that figure was 10%. But the problem–and it is a problem because the vast majority of women desire children–is much more extreme for career women. According to Sylvia Ann Hewlett, an economist and the author of Creating a Life: Professional Women and the Quest for Children, only 51% of ultra-achieving women (those earning more than $100,000 a year) have had children by age 40. Among comparable men, the figure was 81%. A third of less successful working women (earning either $55,000 or $65,000) were also childless at age 40. Sources: The State of Our Unions 2006: Life Without Children, The National Marriage Project, July 2006. Creating a Life: Professional Women and the Quest for Children, Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Miramax Books, 2002. 5. If you do have kids, your wife is more likely to be unhappy. A 2003 study published in the Journal of Marriage and Family concluded that wealthier couples with children suffer a drop in marital satisfaction three times as great as their less affluent peers. One of the study’s co-authors publicly speculated that the reason is that wealthier women are used to “a professional life, a fun, active, entertaining life.” Sources: “Parenthood and Martial Satisfaction: A Meta-Analytic Review,” Jean M. Twenge, W. Keith Campbell, and Craig A. Foster, Journal of Marriage and Family, 2003; “Money doesn’t mean happy parenting,” USA Today, July 21, 2003. 6. Your house will be dirtier. In 2005, two University of Michigan scientists concluded that if your wife has a job earning more than $15 an hour (roughly $30,000 a year), she will do 1.9 hours less housework a week. Of course, this can be solved if the husband picks up a broom. Source: “Data Quality of Housework Hours in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics: Who Really Does The Dishes?”, Alexandra C. Achen and Frank P. Stafford, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, September 2005. 7. You’ll be unhappy if she makes more than you. You aren’t going to like it if she makes more than you do: “Married men’s well-being is significantly lower when married women’s proportional contributions to the total family income are increased.” Source: “Changes in Wives’ Income: Effects on Marital Happiness, Psychological Well-Being, and the Risk of Divorce,” Stacy J. Rogers, Danelle D. DeBoer, Journal of Marriage and Family, May 2001. 8. She will be unhappy if she makes more than you. According to the authors of a controversial 2006 study: “American wives, even wives who hold more feminist views about working women and the division of household tasks, are typically happier when their husband earns 68% or more of the household income.” Reason? “Husbands who are successful breadwinners probably give their wives the opportunity to make more choices about work and family–e.g., working part-time, staying home, or pursuing a meaningful but not particularly remunerative job.” Sources: What’s Love Got To Do With It? W. Bradford Wilcox, Steven L. Nock, Social Forces, March, 2006; http://www.happiestwives.org. 9. You are more likely to fall ill. A 2001 study found that having a wife who works less than 40 hours a week has no impact on your health, but having a wife who works more than 40 hours a week has “substantial, statistically significant, negative effects on changes in her husband’s health over that time span.” The author of another study summarizes that “wives working longer hours not do not have adequate time to monitor their husband’s health and healthy behavior, to manage their husband’s emotional well-being or buffer his workplace stress.” Sources: “It’s About Time and Gender: Spousal Employment and Health,” Ross M. Stolzenberg, American Journal of Sociology, July, 2001; “Marriage, Divorce and the Work and Earnings Careers of Spouses,” Lee A. Lillard, Linda J. Waite, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center, Working Papers, April, 2000.

09-02-2006 05:14 AM

Re: Learn to cite properly, Mr. Noer!
C2shiningC
Contributor
C2shiningC

Here’s the link to The Slide Show text Forbes eliminated by dflynn5656

http://forums.forbes.com/forbes/board/message?board.id=respond_marry_career_woman&message.id=6616

09-02-2006 05:16 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: