3 ms·

This paper drew heavy criticism at the time: http://retractionwatch.com/2016/03/07/lets-not-mischaracterize-replication-studies-authors/ http://retractionwatch.

• wolverine876 4y ago
  > the years since then haven't been kind to landmark results in psychology I've seen those criticisms repeated many times, but IME each time it lacks evidence. We know that is arguably the primary form of misinformation (and disinformation) - repeating false or unfounded assertions until people assume they are true - so the fact that it is accepted by some or repeated or assumed doesn't make it true. (In fact, science was created to address that exact problem.) EDIT: > This paper drew heavy criticism at the time: http://retractionwatch.com http://retractionwatch.com ... The link is to a response by the authors of the original paper. They certainly should be heard, but they are not representative of heavy criticism in the field.