-
-
Replying to @literalbanana
if this isn’t subtweeting my last, it’s a startling coincidence… this table is apparently drawn from Kahneman’s book (which I haven’t read), but could be straight out of the psychology column of _Cosmopolitan_ magazine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_process_theory#Systems …pic.twitter.com/GyyEYJ9nK2
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Welp Banana Retweeted LM Sacasas
Welp Banana added,
3 replies 2 retweets 13 likes -
-
Replying to @Meaningness @literalbanana
Kahneman is supposedly a reputable psychologist, though
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @literalbanana
are there any psychologists more reputable than Zimbardo
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I guess if they are public figures, no? I can list some largely unknown outside the field. Meehl probably comes to the top though. Only generally reputable areas are probably psychometrics, psychophysics, low-level cognitive stuff, and maybe some basic personality psych findings.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
I only encountered Meehl for the first time a year ago and have been impressed with the little I’ve read of him. His lecture series is highly recommended, and I found the first couple exciting, and I’ve meant to watch the rest but haven’t gotten to do so yet
-
-
He's one of a kind. Developed taxometrics, rigorously and logically defined numerous problems with theory-testing in psychology, and was generally humorous in both speech and writing. And despite his solid quantitative work, still said he was betting more on Freud than quant.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.