Finally: peer reviewed pushback against the Lewandowsky, Oberauer, and Gignac paper

Watts Up With That?

lewpaperPaul Matthews writes:

Ruth Dixon and Jonathan Jones have had a comment published in Psychological Science criticising the LOG ‘Moon hoax’ paper (Psych Science) and LGO ‘Role of Conspiracist Ideation’ (PlosOne)

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/03/26/0956797614566469.full

“Reanalysis of the survey data sets of Lewandowsky, Oberauer, and Gignac (2013) and Lewandowsky, Gignac, and Oberauer (2013) indicates that the conclusions of those articles—that conspiracist ideation predicts skepticism regarding the reality of anthropogenic climate change—are not supported by the data”.

As we all know, all you really need to do to show their claims are bogus is to plot their data, which is what D&J do in Fig 1 for LGO (for LOG, it’s in the supplementary information file).

The paper clearly suffered a bit from being edited down to 1000 words.

There’s more at Ruth’s blog on their findings
https://mygardenpond.wordpress.com/2015/03/26/commentary-in-psychological-science/

She writes:

Although Lewandowsky and colleagues were sent our Commentary to review in late 2014, Eric…

View original post 75 more words

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s