While I see the possibility of someone at the insurance company being the “motivated party” to fudge with the data, I agree that it’s difficult to see how one w

While I see the possibility of someone at the insurance company being the “motivated party” to fudge with the data, I agree that it’s difficult to see how one would do about it if one does not know what the researchers would look at. And if I was in charge of the study (or anyone with enough experience I think), that “test” should have been kept secret from the company. This to me implies at least blurry boundaries between the researcher (in this case Ariely) and someone at the company. I will also admit not to be very impartial to this, being to this day very unconvinced by Arielys research and especially his conclusions and the platform he has built around them.