# Critique of Netflix's 100 Humans: A Flawed Experimentation
Written on
Chapter 1: Introduction to 100 Humans
Before diving in, I should clarify that I am neither a scientist nor a doctor, but I do possess a critical mindset. Recently, my boyfriend and I watched Netflix’s attempt at an educational series, 100 Humans. At first, it appeared to be an innovative concept, deviating from our usual viewing habits, and who doesn’t enjoy a good scientific exploration? However, the reality is that the experiments presented are deeply flawed.
This section highlights my personal stance on the show, setting the stage for a detailed critique.
Section 1.1: Methodological Flaws
A significant issue arises from the small sample size of only 100 participants. The first episode claims these subjects represent the entirety of American society, which translates to an average of just two representatives from each state. This is not only inadequate but also problematic as it encompasses a diverse array of age groups, ethnicities, and socioeconomic backgrounds. Such variety introduces numerous variables that can skew results, making it scientifically impossible to derive valid conclusions.
Subsection 1.1.1: The Problem with Sample Size
Section 1.2: Ethical Considerations in Testing
Another critical concern is that participants are fully aware of the behaviors being tested. While ethical guidelines necessitate informing subjects about their involvement in experiments, the awareness of being observed can significantly alter their behavior. This is a fundamental flaw in social experimentation, as it undermines the authenticity of the results.
Chapter 2: Experiment Design and Execution
In one episode, a hypothesis is tested regarding the time women take to prepare compared to men. However, the term “getting ready” is never clearly defined, leading to ambiguity. Instead of measuring the actual preparation process, participants were distracted by free food and drinks while boarding a bus. A better hypothesis would have been to evaluate distraction levels between genders rather than the preparation time itself.
The first video, Everything Wrong With: Netflix's 100 Humans-Ep.1 Race/Attraction, offers a critical perspective on the show’s flawed approach and methodology.
Section 2.1: The Influence of Variables on Results
By episode five, I found myself increasingly frustrated with the experiments. One notably problematic experiment involved testing whether subjects could perceive fake sensations of pain or pleasure. Participants were asked to place their arms under a laser pointer that lacked sufficient strength to elicit any sensation. One group was simply asked to describe their feelings, while another was prompted with a suggestion of warmth and tingling. This inconsistency highlights the power of suggestion, suggesting that the results were skewed by leading questions.
The second video, NETFLIX's 100 Humans is a Pseudo-Scientific Mess, further dissects the inadequacies of the show, emphasizing its lack of scientific rigor.
My Final Thoughts on 100 Humans
I appreciate shows that aim to educate, such as nature documentaries and biographies. However, I find it disappointing when a program like 100 Humans presents itself as educational while failing to uphold scientific integrity. It’s crucial for creators to respect their audience’s intelligence and present reliable information rather than misleading content.
In conclusion, while Netflix’s intent may be to engage viewers, the execution of 100 Humans falls short, leaving much to be desired in terms of scientific credibility.