Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


PhilPapersPhilPeoplePhilArchivePhilEventsPhilJobs
Switch to: References

Add citations

You mustlogin to add citations.
  1. The illusion of credibility: How the pseudosciences appear scientific.August Hämmerli,Claus Beisbart,David Joachim Grüning &Kevin Reuter -manuscript
    The pseudosciences often bear a striking resemblance to the sciences. Using a mimicry account as a framework, this paper investigates how the appearance of social media posts influences people’s perception of the content of such posts as scientific. We present the results of two empiri- cal studies. The first, preparatory study identifies typical characteristics of “scientificness” in social media posts to inform feature manipulations for the main study. The main study then examines what happens if the features are systematically manipulated. (...) The findings support the hypothesis that pseudoscientific digital content benefits from using features of scientificness. We discuss implications for understanding the appeal and persistence of pseudoscience. (shrink)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Gatekeeping in Science: Lessons from the Case of Psychology and Neuro-Linguistic Programming.Katherine Dormandy &Bruce Grimley -2024 -Social Epistemology 38 (3):392-412.
    Gatekeeping, or determining membership of your group, is crucial to science: the moniker ‘scientific’ is a stamp of epistemic quality or even authority. But gatekeeping in science is fraught with dangers. Gatekeepers must exclude bad science, science fraud and pseudoscience, while including the disagreeing viewpoints on which science thrives. This is a difficult tightrope, not least because gatekeeping is a human matter and can be influenced by biases such as groupthink. After spelling out these general tensions around gatekeeping in science, (...) we shed light on them with a case study from psychology. This concerns whether academic psychologists rightly or wrongly classify the applied-psychology framework of NLP (‘neuro-linguistic programming’) as unscientific and even pseudoscientific. This example of gatekeeping is particularly instructive because both the NLP community and the psychology community, we argue, make legitimate but also illegitimate moves. This case gives rise to several general insights about gatekeeping in science more generally. (shrink)
    Direct download(3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Freud, bullshit, and pseudoscience.Michael T. Michael -2024 -Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 108 (C):64-72.
    Direct download(2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Demarcating scientific medicine.Jonathan Fuller -2024 -Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 106 (C):177-185.
    Direct download(2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  

  • [8]ページ先頭

    ©2009-2025 Movatter.jp