5 ms·
Another term to avoid IMHO: "jingle jangle fallacy". It's catchy, but both the word "jingle" and the word "jangle" have established meanings in English neither
by lisper 4y ago
Another term to avoid IMHO: "jingle jangle fallacy". It's catchy, but both the word "jingle" and the word "jangle" have established meanings in English neither of which has anything to do with what is being referred to here. To say nothing of the fact that the "jingle jangle fallacy" is not a fallacy, it's just bad choice of terminology.
Much better words than "jingle jangle fallacy" are "ambiguous" (for one word that has multiple meanings) and "redundant" (for multiple words that have the same meaning) terminology.
(I find it supremely ironic that this needs to be pointed out in an article whose central thesis is that wise choice of terminology is important.)
- scubbo 4y agoThis is the first time I've heard of the word "jangle" existing independently of the onomatopoeiac phrase "jingle jangle"! That said, I definitely agree that this is an ironically-poor choice of name due the lack of relation between the name and the referent.
- runarberg 4y agoThe authors seem to use the term them selfs in this very article, they apparently don’t see it as a problem. > Psychology has long struggled with problems of terminology (Stanovich, 2012). For example, numerous scholars have warned of the jingle and jangle fallacies, the former being the error of referring to different constructs by the same name and the latter the error of referring to the same construct by different names (Kelley, 1927; Block, 1995; Markon, 2009).