While a couple of significant limitations are acknowledged directly in the article (study only on single adults, education evaluation based on remembering it), the most significant does not seem to be called out: it's really measuring a self-reported belief that they struggled (or not) due to (in)sufficient education.
All of those combined makes the article headline quite a stretch: I am mildly confident that a study of the same group (singles 18-98 years old) would find that they struggled with romantic relationships more compared to the random or coupled population, with the same level of sexual education received.
SilverElfin•2mo ago
> it's really measuring a self-reported belief that they struggled (or not) due to (in)sufficient education
Thanks for pointing this out. Common sense also suggests that humans having lived and thrived for a long time before youth sex education existed, so if there are “modern” relationship struggles, it must be some other factor and not the absence of a new education practice.
necovek•2mo ago
I wouldn't go so far: just 50 or 100 years ago (even today in some areas), we had arranged marriages, male dominance (women seen as sexual servants to men) etc.
But the study really does not show anything of interest: it seems to have been specifically designed (without covering obvious biases) to confirm a hypothesis instead of uncover new knowledge.
necovek•2mo ago
All of those combined makes the article headline quite a stretch: I am mildly confident that a study of the same group (singles 18-98 years old) would find that they struggled with romantic relationships more compared to the random or coupled population, with the same level of sexual education received.
SilverElfin•2mo ago
Thanks for pointing this out. Common sense also suggests that humans having lived and thrived for a long time before youth sex education existed, so if there are “modern” relationship struggles, it must be some other factor and not the absence of a new education practice.
necovek•2mo ago
But the study really does not show anything of interest: it seems to have been specifically designed (without covering obvious biases) to confirm a hypothesis instead of uncover new knowledge.