Experimentation in moral psychology without robust, independently verified design is an incredibly slippery slope. This is why certain programs require interdis

Experimentation in moral psychology without robust, independently verified design is an incredibly slippery slope. This is why certain programs require interdisciplinary approaches (e.g., philosophy, psychology, linguistics, math, physics, neuroscience, biology, history). Otherwise people just make stuff up. And if there's no one to run independent replication studies, and no journals require replication studies prior to publication, then we get... this. Just wait for people to dive into the false equivalence of scales and measures used in political research. It's very much "make it up and see if it sticks." The goal appears to be Psychology Today, not scientific rigor. I wrote about this in graduate school, as part of my hefty statistics coursework, it bothered me so much.