3 ms·
The article hints at the pattern, but I think it's worth mentioning directly: it's fairly common for a psychologist with a pet theory to publish a self-help boo
by 0xcde4c3db 11y ago
The article hints at the pattern, but I think it's worth mentioning directly: it's fairly common for a psychologist with a pet theory to publish a self-help book based on it. This creates an incentive to exaggerate the scope, size, and certainty of the effect they claim to have discovered, because their status as a scientific expert on the phenomenon becomes a marketing tool. Even if they don't engage in any deliberate misconduct, this could still create bias that leaks into study design and analysis/interpretation.
- cJ0th 11y agoIronically, these days you find more useful self-help advice by finding similarities between different religions than by reading up on brand new scientific findings.
- pjscott 11y agoBecause the former approach finds things that are obvious enough to have been noted by multiple cultures independently, while the latter approach finds things that seem unlikely enough to be novel -- right? A social scientist will not become famous as a deep, original thinker by telling people to work hard, be patient, keep a reputation for honesty, and eat their vegetables.
- cJ0th 11y agoAs for many popular social scientists I can't even tell whether they aim at becoming famous or whether they're just very ignorant fellows who really think they've "cracked it".
- HelloMcFly 11y agoIt's not just those doing research. Many times, behavioral scientists (or management consultants, or others) read some research with some interesting results and then write a book that is basically a literature review with more anecdotes built in. You don't have to be the researcher yourself to cash in on the self-improvement market.
- johnchristopher 11y agoThis is highly disturbing. What are people suffering from mental illness supposed to do when confronted with such affirmations ?