Scott Alexander defends the concept of automaticity in psychology, arguing that core cognitive biases and priming effects are real, while acknowledging some claims have been overstated. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to a critique of automaticity in psychology, arguing that while some claims about cognitive biases and priming have been overstated, the core concepts are real and well-replicated. He provides examples of cognitive biases, priming effects, and nudges that have strong evidence behind them. Scott compares cognitive biases to optical illusions - real phenomena that affect our perception, but not in ways that make us completely helpless. He argues that automaticity is actually a very old idea about human nature, found in various philosophical and religious traditions. While we shouldn't see ourselves as completely controlled by unconscious forces, Scott suggests that accepting some level of automaticity in our cognition is both realistic and not necessarily problematic. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander addresses feedback on his post about bisexuality and Long COVID, discussing alternative explanations and defending his methodology. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to comments on his previous post about the correlation between bisexuality and Long COVID. He addresses alternative explanations, concerns about sample size and methodology, the nature of psychosomatic illness, and various other points raised by readers. Scott maintains that while the association exists in the data, the cause remains uncertain and could be due to various factors including response patterns, biological differences, or a combination of organic and psychosomatic elements. Shorter summary

The review critiques Haidt's 'The Righteous Mind', praising its contributions while highlighting flaws in its moral foundations theory and political predictions. Longer summary

This review critiques Jonathan Haidt's 'The Righteous Mind', praising its contributions to moral psychology while highlighting significant flaws. The reviewer appreciates Haidt's defense of group selection and moral intuitionism but criticizes his confusion between normative and descriptive claims. The review argues that Haidt's moral foundations theory fails to predict political alignments just a decade after publication, suggesting that political tribalism drives moral intuitions rather than vice versa. Despite these criticisms, the reviewer recommends the book for its thought-provoking nature and its role in advancing empiricism in social science. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that despite some replication failures, the core of behavioral economics remains valid and valuable, with the field continuing to evolve and refine its understanding of human decision-making. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to Jason Hreha's article claiming the 'death of behavioral economics'. He argues that while some studies have failed to replicate, the core insights of behavioral economics remain valid. Scott examines the historical origins of loss aversion, discusses recent debates about its existence, and argues that even small effect sizes can be valuable at scale. He concludes that behavioral economics as a field is generally healthy, continuing to investigate and refine our understanding of human decision-making, though specific paradigms may evolve over time. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander reviews his intellectual progress in the 2010s across various fields, crediting his blog for accelerating learning. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reflects on the intellectual progress he made in the 2010s, largely tracked through his blog posts. He discusses major updates in his understanding of topics like predictive coding theory, psychedelics, mental health, SSRIs, genetics, willpower, nutrition, x-risk, AI, scientific progress, cost disease, the replication crisis, placebo effect, ethics, politics, cultural evolution, social justice, game theory, and enlightenment. He notes that while some were major shifts in position, many represent 'deconfusion' - gaining a better map of the problem space. Scott credits his blog and reader interactions for accelerating his learning in the latter half of the decade. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander partially retracts and corrects his previous findings on age gaps and birth order effects after errors were identified in his analysis. Longer summary

Scott Alexander partially retracts his previous findings on age gaps and birth order effects. He acknowledges that Bucky, a Less Wrong user, found errors in his analysis of SSC survey data. While the original conclusion about firstborn children being overrepresented in high-openness STEM types remains valid, the specific findings about age gaps were partially incorrect. Scott explains the errors, presents Bucky's corrected analysis, and discusses the implications. He emphasizes the importance of data transparency and encourages readers to double-check his work. Shorter summary

Scott examines how the 5-HTTLPR gene was wrongly linked to depression for years, discussing the implications for psychiatric research and genetic testing products. Longer summary

This post discusses the history and eventual debunking of the 5-HTTLPR gene's supposed role in depression. Initially, numerous studies claimed to find links between 5-HTTLPR and various mental health conditions, interactions with stress, and even antidepressant efficacy. However, a recent large-scale study by Border et al. found no evidence for these claims, suggesting that hundreds of previous studies were likely false positives. The post explores the implications of this finding, including concerns about the reliability of psychiatric research, the tendency for studies to reinforce existing beliefs, and the questionable validity of pharmacogenomic testing products that rely on genes like 5-HTTLPR. Shorter summary

The post reviews research on adult neurogenesis, initially presenting evidence for its existence and importance, then reveals a new study suggesting it doesn't occur in humans, examining the implications of this potential field-wide error. Longer summary

This post reviews the literature on adult neurogenesis, initially presenting numerous studies that claimed to find evidence for the generation of new neurons in adult human brains. These studies linked adult neurogenesis to various aspects of brain function, including memory, learning, and depression. However, the post then reveals a new study suggesting that adult neurogenesis doesn't actually occur in humans, or is so rare as to be insignificant. The author examines how this field-wide error could have occurred, discussing the extrapolation of rat studies to humans and the role of confirmation bias. The post ends by reflecting on the implications of this for scientific research and the replication crisis. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critically examines conflicting studies on Amish happiness levels, finding the research too unreliable to draw firm conclusions. Longer summary

Scott Alexander examines conflicting claims about Amish happiness levels compared to modern societies and billionaires. He finds significant inconsistencies and methodological issues in the various studies, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions. The post highlights problems with data interpretation, study replication, and potential confounding factors. Scott emphasizes the unreliability of these early happiness studies, which predate improvements brought by the replication crisis in social science. He concludes that the research is not rigorous enough to make definitive statements about Amish happiness levels relative to other groups. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander presents survey data showing a strong overrepresentation of oldest siblings among his blog readers, challenging the view that birth order effects are negligible. Longer summary

Scott Alexander challenges the mainstream view that birth order effects are negligible, presenting data from his blog survey that shows a strong tendency for oldest children to be overrepresented among his readers. He finds that in families of two children, 71.4% of respondents were the older sibling, with similar patterns in larger families. While he couldn't fully replicate previous studies' findings on IQ differences, he did find a significant difference in Openness to Experience. Scott suggests that birth order may have a stronger effect on intellectual curiosity than previously thought, which could explain the skewed ratios in certain communities. He calls for further research to understand the mechanisms behind this effect and its potential implications. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines his evolving view on scientific consensus, realizing it's more reliable and self-correcting than he previously thought. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reflects on his changing perspective towards scientific consensus, sharing personal experiences where he initially believed he was defying consensus but later discovered that the scientific community was often ahead of or aligned with his views. He discusses examples from various fields including the replication crisis, nutrition science, social justice issues, and AI risk. Alexander concludes that scientific consensus, while not perfect, is remarkably effective and trustworthy, often self-correcting within a decade of new evidence emerging. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines a failed replication of a study claiming analytical thinking promotes religious disbelief, and discusses the broader implications for understanding the relationship between thinking styles and religious belief. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reviews a study by Gervais and Norenzayan (G&N) that claimed analytical thinking promotes religious disbelief, and its subsequent failed replication attempts. The original study consisted of five experiments, including priming participants with images or word tasks before assessing their religious beliefs. The Reproducibility Project's replication of two of these experiments failed to find the same effects. Scott discusses the implications of this failure, noting that even studies that seem well-designed can fail to replicate. He then examines a meta-analysis by Pennycook et al. that found a small but consistent correlation between analytical thinking and irreligiosity across multiple studies. Scott concludes by summarizing key takeaways about the relationship between analytical thinking, IQ, and religious belief, as well as lessons about the replicability of psychological studies. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques a Buzzfeed article skeptical of growth mindset research, arguing that while skepticism is warranted, more robust evidence is needed to disprove the theory. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses a Buzzfeed article criticizing growth mindset research, particularly the work of Carol Dweck. While acknowledging the hype around growth mindset and his own skepticism, Scott argues that the article's critique is not sufficiently robust. He points out that despite the reasons to be suspicious, the growth mindset studies have shown strong results. Scott identifies three main criticisms in the Buzzfeed piece but finds them lacking in strength to fully debunk the theory. He emphasizes the importance of thorough, evidence-based criticism rather than relying on intuition or weak arguments. Scott warns against dismissing potentially valid research too quickly, using an analogy to climate change denial tactics. He concludes by calling for more rigorous efforts to disprove growth mindset if it is indeed flawed. Shorter summary

Scott examines psychological phenomena attributed to the unconscious mind, noting many have failed to replicate, and suggests a shift away from the power of the unconscious in psychological research. Longer summary

This post explores the concept of 'voodoo death' and its parallels in psychology, suggesting that many psychological phenomena previously attributed to the power of the unconscious mind may be less significant than once thought. Scott examines several examples, including the placebo effect, stereotype threat, self-esteem, and social priming, noting that many of these effects have failed to replicate in recent studies. He proposes a pattern of shifting away from the power of the unconscious in psychological research, while acknowledging the limitations of his analysis. The post concludes by considering the implications for Freudian psychology and suggesting a need to reevaluate our understanding of the unconscious mind. Shorter summary

Scott examines new research on ketamine's antidepressant effects and its implications for understanding depression and evaluating psychiatric literature. Longer summary

This post discusses new research on ketamine's antidepressant effects, which suggests they are caused by a metabolite rather than ketamine itself. The author examines how this finding impacts previous research and understanding of ketamine's mechanism of action. He reviews studies on NMDA antagonists and finds mixed results, with some potential bias when conflicts of interest are present. The post concludes by reflecting on the implications for trusting psychiatric literature, especially in cases with conflicts of interest. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that psychology is indeed in crisis, contrary to a New York Times article's claim, due to issues like publication bias and low replication rates. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques a New York Times article claiming psychology is not in crisis despite low replication rates. He argues that the article ignores publication bias, experimenter effects, and low base rates of true hypotheses. Scott contends that even if failed replications are due to different conditions, this still represents a crisis as it undermines the practical utility of psychological findings. He suggests that while we can't investigate every failed replication, studying some might reveal why replication issues keep occurring in psychology. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander analyzes two conflicting studies on gender bias in STEM hiring, exploring reasons for their contradictory results and the challenges in reaching a definitive conclusion. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses two contradictory studies on gender bias in STEM hiring, one showing bias against women and another showing bias in favor of women. He explores possible reasons for the discrepancy, including differences in methodology and potential experimenter bias. The post highlights the difficulty in reaching a definitive conclusion on this issue despite its importance and the resources dedicated to studying it. Scott suggests that the conflicting results might be due to subtle experimenter effects and proposes a joint study by both teams as a potential solution. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques a meta-analysis supporting psychic phenomena to illustrate flaws in scientific methodology and meta-analysis. Longer summary

Scott Alexander examines a meta-analysis by Daryl Bem that claims to provide strong evidence for psychic phenomena (psi). While Bem's analysis follows many best practices for scientific rigor, Alexander argues it likely suffers from experimenter effects and other biases that can produce false positive results. He uses this to illustrate broader issues with the scientific method and meta-analysis, concluding that even seemingly rigorous studies and meta-analyses can produce incorrect conclusions. This challenges the idea that scientific consensus and meta-analysis are the highest forms of evidence. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander humorously proposes a reality TV show called 'Replication Lab!' to address the crisis of replication in psychology by making the process more entertaining. Longer summary

Scott Alexander proposes a humorous solution to the crisis of replication in psychology: a reality TV show called 'Replication Lab!'. The show would attempt to replicate famous experiments each week, turning the unglamorous task of replication into entertaining television. The post describes a hypothetical episode, complete with dramatic tension, human interest stories, and the potential for career-ruining failures to replicate. The satirical proposal aims to make replication more appealing and address the serious issue of unreliable research in a lighthearted way. Shorter summary