Comments on: Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman calls for 'daisy chain' of psychology replications http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/10/04/daniel-kahneman-daisy-chain-replications-priming-psychology/ Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:00:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Ed Yong http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/10/04/daniel-kahneman-daisy-chain-replications-priming-psychology/#comment-16066 Ed Yong Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:02:19 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7731#comment-16066 I can confirm that the comment from Kahneman is real. He sent it to me, asking me to send it to Brian to be posted, which I did. I can also confirm that while I did not write the headline for the Nature piece, I also think it's a fair representation of the article. I send Kahneman a link to the piece after it was up. He replied to me saying that he was disappointed that the letter was described as a "challenge" but that he could understand how it was perceived thus. He also said the rest of the report was entirely accurate. He did not mention anything about the "clean up their act" bit of the headline. I can confirm that the comment from Kahneman is real. He sent it to me, asking me to send it to Brian to be posted, which I did.

I can also confirm that while I did not write the headline for the Nature piece, I also think it’s a fair representation of the article. I send Kahneman a link to the piece after it was up. He replied to me saying that he was disappointed that the letter was described as a “challenge” but that he could understand how it was perceived thus. He also said the rest of the report was entirely accurate. He did not mention anything about the “clean up their act” bit of the headline.

]]> By: Claudiu Bandea http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/10/04/daniel-kahneman-daisy-chain-replications-priming-psychology/#comment-16065 Claudiu Bandea Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:26:21 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7731#comment-16065 If the presumed letter by Daniel Kahneman posted by Brian Owens in his comment above is real, I wonder why would he ask somebody else to post it for him? If the presumed letter by Daniel Kahneman posted by Brian Owens in his comment above is real, I wonder why would he ask somebody else to post it for him?

]]> By: YH http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/10/04/daniel-kahneman-daisy-chain-replications-priming-psychology/#comment-16064 YH Fri, 12 Oct 2012 17:36:49 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7731#comment-16064 Brian Owens said Posted on behalf of Daniel Kahneman: I write to complain about the irresponsible and damaging title that was affixed to Ed Yong’s piece on October 3. The headline asserts that Nobel laureates challenges … to clean up their act. There is no challenge in my letter, and certainly not a challenge for anyone to “clean up their act.†Instead, I offered friendly advice to colleagues whose work I respect, about an image problem they face and how they might deal with it. The misleading title outraged many of my friends, and probably caused real damage by making it harder for priming researchers to address my suggestion. I would not have expected misleading headlines from “Nature,†and hope you will be kind enough to publish this correction. Regards, Daniel Kahneman Brian Owens said

Posted on behalf of Daniel Kahneman:

I write to complain about the irresponsible and damaging title that was affixed to Ed Yong’s piece on October 3. The headline asserts that Nobel laureates challenges … to clean up their act. There is no challenge in my letter, and certainly not a challenge for anyone to “clean up their act.†Instead, I offered friendly advice to colleagues whose work I respect, about an image problem they face and how they might deal with it. The misleading title outraged many of my friends, and probably caused real damage by making it harder for priming researchers to address my suggestion. I would not have expected misleading headlines from “Nature,†and hope you will be kind enough to publish this correction.

Regards,
Daniel Kahneman

]]> By: Weza Wunderin http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/10/04/daniel-kahneman-daisy-chain-replications-priming-psychology/#comment-16063 Weza Wunderin Fri, 05 Oct 2012 14:44:36 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7731#comment-16063 In addition to showing how their work can be independently replicated, these social-psych priming researchers may need to be a bit more forthcoming about sharing their data: http://bit.ly/PZZRsL In addition to showing how their work can be independently replicated, these social-psych priming researchers may need to be a bit more forthcoming about sharing their data:

http://bit.ly/PZZRsL

]]> By: Gretchen Icenogle http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/10/04/daniel-kahneman-daisy-chain-replications-priming-psychology/#comment-16062 Gretchen Icenogle Thu, 04 Oct 2012 18:59:55 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/?p=7731#comment-16062 There's a fascinating but almost silent meta-conversation going on here around and about the question of "priming effects" in the practice of science itself, most obvious in David Funder's contention that "For scientists, it should be that the data is the data, and let the chips fall where they may." While this is superficially rational, it is a long way from reasonable: his "should" has only a wistful and tenuous relationship with what *is.* Fortunately for the health of science, Kahneman ascribes no superhuman objectivity to the fallible individuals who practice it; his remarkable sanity is founded on a deep appreciation for the many varieties of irrationality that inform all of our attempts to interpret the "given" facts. There’s a fascinating but almost silent meta-conversation going on here around and about the question of “priming effects” in the practice of science itself, most obvious in David Funder’s contention that “For scientists, it should be that the data is the data, and let the chips fall where they may.” While this is superficially rational, it is a long way from reasonable: his “should” has only a wistful and tenuous relationship with what *is.* Fortunately for the health of science, Kahneman ascribes no superhuman objectivity to the fallible individuals who practice it; his remarkable sanity is founded on a deep appreciation for the many varieties of irrationality that inform all of our attempts to interpret the “given” facts.

]]>