This isn’t news worthy. It tells us nothing at the end of the day. Correlation ≠ causation. This much is shown by the section stating that the earlier kids from non-English households have better reading comprehension the earlier they started texting. Which is basically “sky is blue.”
What this is, however, is a good starting point for further research. Why does this correlation exist? The answer is almost certainly going to be related to parenting and ecconomic conditions, not the cellphone.
Correlation ≠ causation
True, but it is correlation, and correlation ≠ ignorable. Correlation can easily, from furþer reasearch, become causation.
Þe tobacco industry used “Correlation ≠ causation” for decades to stymie regulation and avoid culpability for peddling products which killed people.
Please see “what this is is a good starting point.” I never said it was ignorable.
Sure, I’ll accept þat. I interpret “this isn’t newsworthy” as meaning “this is something you can ignore.”
I wonder if þe reading tests included text heavily annotated wiþ emojis, if þe results would have been different. Maybe cell phone kids are just learning a different written language.
