4 ms·

too disorganized. I prefer these linked lists, I collectively call them the skeptic's bible. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies http://en.wikipedi

too disorganized. I prefer these linked lists, I collectively call them the skeptic's bible. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

tokenadult 17y ago
Thanks for the Wikipedia lists link. I like Shermer's writings for the examples that they give as he discusses general principles. After edit: Oh, and there is some doubt that the Hawthorne effect (mentioned in the link you kindly shared) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect#Interpretations_and_criticisms_of_the_Hawthorne_studies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect#Interpretation... is a genuine phenomenon.
- tlb 17y ago
  Really? You don't believe such an effect ever happens? It's one thing to say that particular results are not due to the effect, but the effect itself seems like a pretty likely source of error in any not-very-rigorous experiment.
  - tokenadult 17y ago
    I spent most of my youth believing that there is a Hawthorne effect as described in the usual anecdote, but then on Usenet in the 1990s a psychologist referred me to a peer-reviewed article that actually went back to the data gathered by the original researchers. The article said that it is more likely that the change in worker performance was due to operant conditioning based on changed working conditions that were going on at the same time as the changes in factory lighting and so forth that the anecdote is about. Is there any replication http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html of a straight-up Hawthorne effect anywhere else in the peer-reviewed literature?
    - tlb 17y ago
      OK, fair enough. It hasn't been convincingly demonstrated. But maybe you'll agree that it's still a good idea to watch out for the Hawthorne effect when doing human performance research, because it seems like a possible source of error. You wouldn't tell experimenters "there is no Hawthorne effect, so stop worrying about it."

tokenadult 17y ago

Thanks for the Wikipedia lists link. I like Shermer's writings for the examples that they give as he discusses general principles. After edit: Oh, and there is some doubt that the Hawthorne effect (mentioned in the link you kindly shared) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect#Interpretations_and_criticisms_of_the_Hawthorne_studies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect#Interpretation... is a genuine phenomenon.

tlb 17y ago
Really? You don't believe such an effect ever happens? It's one thing to say that particular results are not due to the effect, but the effect itself seems like a pretty likely source of error in any not-very-rigorous experiment.
- tokenadult 17y ago
  I spent most of my youth believing that there is a Hawthorne effect as described in the usual anecdote, but then on Usenet in the 1990s a psychologist referred me to a peer-reviewed article that actually went back to the data gathered by the original researchers. The article said that it is more likely that the change in worker performance was due to operant conditioning based on changed working conditions that were going on at the same time as the changes in factory lighting and so forth that the anecdote is about. Is there any replication http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html of a straight-up Hawthorne effect anywhere else in the peer-reviewed literature?
  - tlb 17y ago
    OK, fair enough. It hasn't been convincingly demonstrated. But maybe you'll agree that it's still a good idea to watch out for the Hawthorne effect when doing human performance research, because it seems like a possible source of error. You wouldn't tell experimenters "there is no Hawthorne effect, so stop worrying about it."