The low response rate begs for further studies to confirm or refute, and further refine these findings. This study does not appear to be well enough done to have the results taken seriously. At best the study suggests an area in which further inquiry is needed. The study needs to be redone, using better methods, before trying to draw conclusions. Before printing the results of this study and treating them as representative and valid, journalists should have run the study through a hazing, spanking it all the way down the line.
Science requires certain hazing-like rituals before research can be considered valid.
The media could learn a lot from that process.