<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Dan TheBookMan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:danust2012@gmail.com" target="_blank">danust2012@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><p style="margin:0px;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:Helvetica"><span style="font-size:12pt"><a href="http://retractionwatch.com/2017/02/20/placed-much-faith-underpowered-studies-nobel-prize-winner-admits-mistakes/" target="_blank">http://retractionwatch.com/<wbr>2017/02/20/placed-much-faith-<wbr>underpowered-studies-nobel-<wbr>prize-winner-admits-mistakes/</a></span></p><p style="margin:0px;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:Helvetica"><span style="font-size:12pt"><br></span></p><p style="margin:0px;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:Helvetica"><span style="font-size:12pt">From earlier this year. Given how often I see his (and Tversky's) book cited, this is very interesting. </span></p><p style="margin:0px;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:Helvetica"><span style="font-size:12pt"><br></span></p><p style="margin:0px;font-size:12px;line-height:normal;font-family:Helvetica"><span style="font-size:12pt">Also, Retraction Watch looks like a great resource.</span></p><br><div style="line-height:normal"><div style="line-height:normal"><span style="line-height:20px;background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Regards,</span></div><div style="line-height:normal"><span style="line-height:20px;background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><br></span></div><div><div style="line-height:normal"><span style="line-height:20px;background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Dan</span></div><div style="line-height:normal"><span style="line-height:20px;background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">   <br></span></div></div></div><div><div style="line-height:normal"></div></div></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0);display:inline">​It's not only Kahneman - it's everybody in psychology and several other fields as well.  I am sure most of us are aware of the cognitive biases prevalent in researchers, of which there are several.  Refusal of journals to publish negative results.  Acceptance of border line studies without replication, and a lot more. Increasing use of Bayes has been suggested as one fix.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">​This does in no way invalidate most of Kahneman's and Tversky's work.  Priming has had very recent troubles too, though I have no doubts that it is a real phenomenon..  (Insert cliche' here - more research is needed).</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">There is no question that subtle cues in our environment affect our unconscious and then, later perhaps, our conscious.  Subliminal perception?  Yes.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Bill W​</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0);display:inline">​</div><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>