I definitely see that side of things. I've begun to really dislike the 'correlation is not causation' statement because people have heard that so many times ... many simply ignore it (when they shouldn't.) Never mind that sometimes correlation is actually a fine measure if taken in the right context, but that type of subtlety is lost of many, if not most.
A lot of this has to do with the way
it is presented. Too many times it's delivered in a way that makes it seem definitive, even when the author of the research knows it isn't.
Is that for linkbait? Maybe. Is it simple marketing? Might be. And it's certainly working.
The result is a lot of second-hand zombie like practitioners who are substituting someone else's thoughts for their own critical analysis. And that's
bad for our industry.