I’m still broadly supportive of the heuristics and biases program. I still think Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment and Thinking, Fast and Slow are worth reading. This sort of stuff is based on deep-seated elements of human cognitive neurological architecture. They’re not fabricated out of whole cloth.
But, the replication crisis has been a total disaster for huge swaths of science, and that’s probably a good thing.
BuzzFeed came out with a review of l’affaire Ariely and there’s not much there beyond what you could find in social media. Many of the researchers did not respond to calls for interviews, which I think is reasonable, since they are speaking directly in their own words on Twitter and their websites. This is better than talking to the media, which is going to twist their comments to fit some narrative. The interesting thing about BuzzFeed’s piece is it reminds us of the period in the late 2000’s when pop-social science was huge and massive inferences were generated by small (or now we know fraudulent) data. Perhaps we’ve at least moved on beyond that?
And yet let me point you to my previous post on testosterone. On Twitter, a correspondent argued that Matt Walker’s Why We Sleep: Unlocking the Power of Sleep and Dreams is just as bad. So perhaps it didn’t get better?