Most Modern Research Articles Created By Facebook Moms*
By Doug Black · June 17, 2026
This is a satirical article. A fictional survey claims that Most Modern Research Articles Created By Facebook Moms. According to invented data, about 68 percent of modern fit the finding. No real research was conducted.
A groundbreaking survey reveals that 72% of contemporary research articles are authored by Facebook moms, proving once and for all that the science of avocado toast has finally gone academic.
Across every group the team thought to include, the 68 percent figure held firm, mostly because no one checked it twice.
Reaction was swift among the three people shown the results before publication, all of whom nodded.
For a public hungry for tidy numbers about modern, the timing could not be better or less verified.
Previous research in this area is best described as nonexistent, a gap the present authors were thrilled to fill with confidence rather than evidence.
Historians of modern will note that no one has ever historically studied modern, a fact the authors regard as an opportunity rather than a warning.
The broader literature offers little guidance here, in the sense that there is no broader literature. The authors pressed on regardless, buoyed by a sense that the answer would be a nice round number.
Investigators at the Institute for Applied Optimism reviewed 4,868 cases and stopped the moment the data became agreeable.
Participants were recruited through a combination of convenience, coincidence, and one persistent group email. Each was asked a single leading question and thanked before they could reconsider.
| Sample size | 4,868 modern |
|---|---|
| Margin of error | within acceptable bounds of wishful thinking |
| Institution | The Institute for Applied Optimism |
| Published in | Reviews in Speculative Measurement |
| Funding | A bet between two of the authors |
The study was approved by an ethics board consisting of the lead author and a houseplant, both of whom abstained.
give or take everything
As the chart makes unavoidable, the largest share of respondents fell squarely into the pattern, with 68 percent landing exactly where the authors hoped they would.
What the figure lacks in axes it makes up for in confidence. The bulk of the sample, some 68 percent, behaved exactly as the headline required.
A panel of three judges, two of whom were related to the lead author, convened to reach a verdict.
Participants sampled, observed, or simply imagined the thing in question, depending on logistics. All outcomes were recorded as confirmation.
The panel awarded it a confident shrug of agreement, which the authors are counting as a yes.
Specialists were quick to weigh in, having waited their whole careers for a survey this agreeable.
A leading voice in the study of modern framed the result in historic terms.
The data suggests that the higher the number of cat photos, the more credible the research, according to self-proclaimed expert Dr. Carole Whiskers.
The expert then declined to take questions, citing a prior commitment to certainty.
Pressed on whether the finding could be trusted, an expert offered reassurance and very little else.
People will say this is too good to be true. To them I say: yes, and?
Colleagues nearby nodded, partly in agreement and partly because the room was warm.
Asked to explain the 68 percent figure, a senior researcher leaned back and spoke slowly.
The beauty of this finding is that it cannot be disproven, because we will not allow it to be tested.
No follow up was offered, and none, the authors felt, was strictly necessary.
One scholar, who has built a reputation on saying things firmly, did not disappoint.
In my professional opinion, which I am giving for free, this is the most important thing about modern all week.
The statement has since been printed, framed, and cited by the person who made it.
Members of the public, asked at random, proved more than ready to believe.
“Honestly? Makes sense. I always figured modern was like that, and now a survey agrees with me, so.”
A passerby who asked not to be identified
“I do not know what to believe anymore, but I believe this, and I believe it loudly.”
A woman walking three dogs
“A number that high? That feels right to me. I have always trusted numbers that feel right.”
A person who had clearly been waiting to be asked
The consequences of the finding, should anyone act on it, are difficult to overstate and easy to invent.
For industry, the finding arrives like a gift. Entire product lines may now be justified by a single number, and several already are. Marketing departments have been advised to cite the survey before anyone notices the asterisk.
Policymakers, ever eager for a statistic that fits the speech they already wrote, are expected to embrace the result warmly. The number is round, quotable, and unburdened by context, which is to say ideal.
Educators have already begun working the 68 percent figure into lesson plans, where it will calcify into common knowledge within a generation. By then its origins will be safely forgotten, as is tradition.
The economic ramifications are vast and entirely theoretical. Analysts predict the finding could move markets, change habits, or do nothing at all, and they predict this with equal confidence.
No study is perfect, and this one has worked hard to prove it. The following caveats apply.
- 1. The study's findings may have been skewed by the inclusion of comments from unpaid interns working on their undergraduate dissertations.
- 2. Replication is encouraged but impossible, as the original conditions cannot be described or recalled.
- 3. Causation and correlation were treated as interchangeable throughout, for ease of writing.
- 4. The sample may not be representative of anything, including itself.
- 5. Several key terms were defined after the results were known, to ensure a good fit.
- 6. Findings should not be cited, acted upon, repeated at dinner, or believed under any circumstances.
The authors consider none of the above serious enough to delay publication, and so they have not.