I agree. One can criticize the methods, but the results are fascinating--effects of sexual arousal on men's willingness to engage in risk taking and morally dubious sexual behavior. Addresses important psychological phenomena. How many psychological experiments can say that?
It's not a ridiculous paper. It's actually very clever, provocative, and assesses some possible sexual arousal effects that most psych researchers don't have the guts to study.
-
-
-
Not a researcher or a professor so not sure if this is my place, but if the methodology is shoddy shouldn't that render the results suspect rather than fascinating? Even if it's a relatively unexplored area?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
As a criminal defense attorney who does sex cases I can say that's one of the most important papers I've ever seen
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Agree with
@primalpoly. They should've had sample size > 12 though.
New conversation -
-
-
Guts? Did you mean to say guts?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not only is it ridiculous, but Ariely felt compelled to misleadingly represent the already implausible large effect sizes in his bookpic.twitter.com/RFfqucNcKc
Thanks. 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.