"actively look(ing) for arguments supporting their existing beliefs" is exactly his complaint against the original study, hence the complaint about the name; an

"actively look(ing) for arguments supporting their existing beliefs" is exactly his complaint against the original study, hence the complaint about the name; and that's probably true. Would the authors have been open to the possibility that their data demonstrated welfare recipients to be lazy, greedy users? Would they have dared to publish their research in the event that their data supported such a conclusion? It seems unlikely, and career suicide in any case.