Delete the Yelp App, Take a Break from Academic Duties, and Learn About Your Local Food Scene

As graduate students, we need outlets and interests that allow for some external interaction. Dining out and learning about your local food culture is one way to merge outside of our individual lanes and connect with a greater community. While tempted to turn to Yelp or Doordash to learn about local eateries, we should try and reach out to fellow students or faculty/staff at our university for real-life and personal recommendations. 

As a graduate student myself, I have spent a significant amount of time cooking independently. And at this point, in my twenties, many expect me to carry out this task without complaint or personal struggle. Although I continue to step up to the plate (no pun intended) to face this reality of independence, I still hold a deep fascination with food others prepare. 

Illustration by Gabriel Alcala for NBC News

Ever since I was about five years old, I have experienced a powerful interest in what other people eat. Whether a classmate’s lunch, a dinner prepared by a neighbor, or a meal out, the possibility of tasting a dish made outside my own family’s kitchen spiked my curiosity. This love did not disappear as I grew older, in fact it only matured. Anthony Bourdain, food media on YouTube, and Yelp became my sources. But nothing encouraged my inclination to explore my surrounding’s cuisine like Yelp. 

Yelp became an escape. Rather than endure the silence that accompanies solitude, I would whip out my phone and observe as many local restaurants and eateries as possible. I could see both food and beverage establishments, perusing every type of cuisine without any inkling to focus on one. Being from California’s Bay Area helped. The region harbors every type of food imaginable.  

Although I still love a diversity of restaurants, Yelp became far too influential over my decisions and disconnected me from the spontaneity of trying new foods organically. Everything I tasted as a kid came through a synthesis of family, neighbors, classmates, and restaurants. Food for me was a combination of personalities that emanated from my environment, not from my cell phone. So, when I moved from the East Bay to attend Fresno State, I decided to learn about the local food scene through word of mouth rather than Yelp. 

The first recommendation came from my cousin who suggested I try Heirloom in North Fresno’s Park Crossing shopping center. While highly reviewed on the app I am now trying to avoid, eating there felt much more personal than had I found it using the internet. The food was simply delicious. I tried the Shrimp Teppanyaki on top of a neat bed of bacon-fried rice. The shrimp was crispy and tangy, and the rice was comforting and satisfying. From observing dozens of signs around town, I have learned that teppanyaki is a big thing in Fresno and this American establishment did a fantastic job presenting their take. 

My next dining experience was with a classmate at Taqueria Pancho, a spot he recommended. It’s situated in a somewhat bucolic orchard on the corner of W. Shields and N. Cornelia in Fresno. The food was incredible. I had pastor and pollo tacos with all the toppings that I’d gathered from their small but abundant salsa, onion, and cilantro bar. While small, the tortillas were piled high with protein, chopped up into savory smithereens!

The same classmate, along with others, and my cousin, also recommended Pad Thai on Shaw Avenue. Everyone in the area seems to know about this restaurant. The portions were copious. Thai food in the Bay Area is a little different. The restaurants seem to emphasize spice, heat, and street food, with less attention given to portion size, sweetness, and customer service like at this restaurant. 

I sampled from a plate of Pad See Ew with beef, a dish of Chili Jam Chicken, and a platter of vegetables in a tasty broth. The wide, flat rice noodles had that signature chew, the sweet flavor of the chicken was addicting, and the vegetables were ample. I emphasize the word platter in my description of the vegetables, for it was a large display of quality steamed veggies fit for a family’s holiday gathering! 

A final dining out experience came from a slightly more impersonal recommendation, but one that still connected me to family. A close relative sent me an article about a local filmmaker named Enrique Meza. Meza described how the Central Valley impacted him as a person and as an artist. In the article, he recommended the asada tacos from Taqueria El Premio Mayor. This stood out to me because I had just driven by a small strip mall on Maroa Street and believed I saw that specific name on the signage in the parking lot. I decided that this was a new opportunity to try some more Fresno food from a local’s suggestion. 

I went there one afternoon and made the mistake of only ordering one asada taco. The taco was too small for dinner, so I refrigerated it, along with the rice and beans I ordered, to have another time. I finally had it two days later and reheated it in the microwave, which typically depletes the flavors of their original integrity. Despite being microwaved, the asada was delicious! The texture still had the bite one desires in steak, without the chew associated with poorer quality meat. 

Moving to another city for our education, and dining out alone, can be isolating and lonely experiences. Applications such as Yelp, DoorDash, and PostMates can further fuel feelings of separateness while eating alone. As graduate students, we often get caught in our own individual experiences, whether embedded in our studies or in the kitchen. However, we may feel more connected and familiar with both food and our surroundings if we reach out to people we meet and ask for restaurant recommendations. Eating can become a social activity when shared with others through personal suggestion and/or face-to-face conversation. 

By: Karly Kurkjian

What’s your source?

The importance of understanding basic concepts of research design and statistics in everyday life.

We are almost at the end of 2021, and like many of us, I’m sure I’m still processing the culmination of horrors that was 2020 and am in no way prepared to accept that 2022 is at our doorstep. So, let’s do a brief recap of what we saw in 2020. Parts of Australia and the west coast of the United States burned uncontrollably for months. Covid-19 and its rippling effects spread across the world. We had two impeachment charges, an acquittal, and an election. The Pentagon released documents and videos validating the existence of UFOs. Murder hornets became part of our vocabulary. Megan and Harry decided they didn’t want to be royals anymore. An obscene number of political, Hollywood, and YouTube star scandals emerged. It seemed like every day we were, and continue to be, bombarded by some new bit of salacious information that we are forced to analyze on the fly.

During this time, I realized how thankful I am for everything I learned about research design and statistics. I found myself applying things I learned in classes like Psych 144. That knowledge enabled me to think critically about the information presented to me on the news, on social media, and in conversations with peers. I found that I could make informed decisions about the factuality of statements by finding a source and asking myself a few questions.

  1. What’s the source?

Research-heavy disciplines often rely on peer-reviewed data as the burden of proof for the factuality and reliability of a statement. In general, one may feel better about sources that come from websites that end in .edu, .org, or .gov. However, if the source is anything but one of these, it’s recommended that you take the information with a grain of salt. References often found outside the peer-reviewed arena might discuss opinion rather than scientifically proven statements.

  • Who was involved?

This question has two parts. First, we want to know not only who did the research but also what the descriptive statistics were for the research participants. The first part of the question investigates what, if any, bias may exist within the research. For example, if a person from Coca-Cola presents data on Coca-Cola, we may assume that the information being offered might be favorable to Coca-Cola. On the other side, if a person from Pepsi is presenting data on Coca-Cola, bias may also be found. The person or persons analyzing the data should be transparent about any stake they may have in the research. Knowing who is reporting that data can help a researcher decide on the validity that source’s claims.

The second question asks about the sample’s descriptive statistics; sometimes this is reported as demographics. The descriptive statistics tell us how many people participated in the research and usually includes general information like age, race, and gender. However, demographics can also contain more information, including income, education level, and marital status. These descriptive stats are essential because research findings are only as robust as the population they represent. For example, if I were testing a product meant for all young adults aged 8 to 18, but only collected data from a sample consisting of young adults from one socioeconomic class that was homogenous ethnicity-wise and between the ages of 12 to 14, I would not be accurately representing my specified population. Whatever data came from that sample group could not be easily or accurately applied.

Having an idea of the demographics can help us decide how applicable the information is to our family, community, or the United States as a whole. For example, if a piece of research claims that something applies broadly to people, but the descriptive statistics are very narrow, then it’s improbable that the claims are valid. They may be valid within that sample, but it wouldn’t seem likely to apply to the overall population.

  • What is the statistical significance of the reported data?

Let’s talk about p-value and statistical significance. P-value describes the probability that the results of a study could be entirely random or wrong. A low p-value is good because it means there is a low chance that the reported results happened because of luck or chance rather than sound science. The threshold set for most studies is p < .05, meaning the p-value is less the 5% or a 1-in-20 chance of the results being wrong or random. P-values less than .05 are considered statistically significant; however, some scientists set their research p-value at a lower threshold of 0.001, meaning that there is a 1-in-1000 chance of being wrong, or that the results were random. Results that fall below this p-value are deemed statistically highly significant.

We can say whatever we want about our research as eloquently or provocatively as we can, but if the p-value is more .05, throw the whole study in the bin. Okay, that’s a bit dramatic, but if we review a study to determine if the hypothesis or research claim is true or false, we need to look no further than the p-value. The research may have provided some interesting talking and jumping-off points for new research, but if it did not reach statistical significance, it did not affirm their hypothesis.

Critical thinking is crucial in our current socio-political medical climate. Not every statement is a verifiable fact. How we evaluate cited research that supports personal or political views can help keep us calm and think rationally in an environment that seems hell-bent on constantly shaking us up. When we hear something salacious, remember to stop and consider these questions: Where did the research come from to support this statement? Who was involved in the research? Did the research achieve statistical significance? If you do that first, you’ll be in a much better position to assess the claim.

By Courtney Hill