Posts

Comments

Comment by akhil_jalan on Is it true that most studies in Kahneman's 'Thinking fast and slow' are not replicable and the book is largely not supported by evidence? · 2023-03-16T22:50:44.299Z · LW · GW

https://replicationindex.com/2020/12/30/a-meta-scientific-perspective-on-thinking-fast-and-slow/#comments

The results cited in Kahneman's book score poorly on replicability measures. This is not his fault, just a general flaw in the psychology literature that was unknown to experts pre-replication crisis. Some of the claims in the book, like the concept of priming in Chapter 4, have been largely refuted by the literature. Table 1 of the link above gives a more detailed breakdown. Quoting, 

"Tversky and Kahneman (1971) themselves warned against studies that provide so little evidence for a hypothesis. A 50% probability of answering multiple choice questions correctly is also used to fail students. So, we decided to give chapters with an R-Index below 50 a failing grade. Other chapters with failing grades are Chapter 3, 6, 711, 14, 16. Chapter 24 has the highest highest score (80, wich is an A- in the Canadian grading scheme), but there are only 8 results."